I think EVs are the future, yes. There's already several governments and companies with EV/Hybrid and EV only production by 2030, and most people would buy an EV for daily use if they were affordable and had infrastructure to support it.
The arguments against EVs are lessening (though recycling batteries and unethical mining practices are still major concerns), like "what about cold weather/charging stations" and so on.
That said, I think the real future is in well-designed cities with walkable/bikable areas being the norm, cars reglated to further and less populated areas of cities, and heavy public transportation like trains and electric buses.
Between less fossil fuel intensive infrastructure, reclaiming unused urban spaces (rooftops etc) for solar design, and deep energy retrofitting oldee buildings and communities, I think that stands as the best possible solution for future city infrastructure.
Cars are just one small part of the problem for the future. Sustainable design and practice in the real world needs to become more mainstream, or we won't have to worry about a future.
Not yet, technology needs to come a lot further and prices need to come down.
As of today I am not aware of any electric pickup truck that can compete in the diesel power/range class of existing diesel pickup trucks.
Such as towing up to 27,000 pounds (5th wheel or gooseneck trailer) and travelling for 500 without stopping. I know electric is extremely powerful, but it needs to last that long too... no one is going to use or buy them if they have to stop and charge every hundred or so miles for a hour or more.
We are kind of getting technology there for little things, like scooters, maybe motorbikes and such... but even the electric cars that are on the market are too pricy.
We need lots more innovation and less regulation to get there. If electric vehicles are so much better, the free market will take over.
Batteries though are a problem, so I'll jokingly say maybe they should forget batteries and just build tesla towers every so often along every roadway... sarcasm right.
No. At least not at our current level of technology.
1. The electricity for these cars has to be produced. Where does it come from? Mainly gas and coal. This means the very products being offered to reduce the use of coal and gas are being powered by coal and gas.
2. You are not saving money by using electric cars over gas ones. You have to charge the car. That electricity costs money. Even without the burden of charging a car, most U. S. families face astronomical electric bills. This will only get worse when adding a car to be charged. Even if you use a charging station in public, that will still cost around the same as filling a tank of gas.
3. You cannot drive as far on a full charge of electricity as you can on a full tank of gas. That means you need to recharge more often. This costs precious travel time and therefore is not sustainable for vehicles that transport goods.
4. Electricity can be controlled by the government easier than gas. For example, ANYTHING electronic can be hacked. If someone is driving an electric car, governments can hack the electrical charge stations and therefore block you from refueling. The U. S. is currently dealing with a government that loves to punish those who dare so much as to speak a different opinion than the government. Do you really want a government like that to be able to control your ability to move freely? When gasoline is in a tank, you have to physically empty or alter the tank.
Electric public transportation and cars - yes, bc they have big batteries and places to be recharged after the work day. But trucks, ships and even planes - I don't think so. These travel long distances, often within the thousands of miles and with the near future capabilities of traveling 300-400 miles with a single recharge, that's not gonna be economically reliable enough for anyone, let alone for the companies that run them. Not to mention that if you wanna travel farther, you need a bigger battery. Eventually the space for the battery will run out and you won't be able to put a bigger battery, thus you'll be stuck with a vehicle that can travel only so far.
The only thing that's gonna be reliable enough for these types of transportation (trucks, ships and planes) in my opinion is nuclear power bc it's endless and doesn't need recharging. I know some of you will think that's science fiction but it's not. Russia has nuclear powered ships (ice breakers), so it's doable. I know for sure about "Russia" bc I watched a video about it a few years ago but there might be more ships than just that one. So if the Russians can have a nuclear powered ship, that means it's perfectly doable for smaller transport vehicles.
But I'm pretty sure no manufacturer will ever make a nuclear powered vehicle because they don't want you to have an eternal vehicle that will outlive the human civilization. They want you to keep paying for maintenance - for a short life battery that reaches its end of life in 2 years tops and for other short living components of your vehicle, which includes even the firmware of the onboard computer (preprogrammed old age).
Highly unlikely. My father who is very good at science said, almost all electric energy is generated with fossile fuels and that is considerabley less than 100% so electrical energy would cost more. Also, there is no known way to cheaply store large amounts of electrical energy and batteries are very expensive and don't last decades like inexpensive gas tanks do. Furthermore, it take 5 or 10 minutes to fill up with gas but at least 2 hours to fully charge an electric car. No one want to wait that long plus, because it takes a dozen times as long, it would require a dozen times as many charging outlets as gal pumps. Electric motors may cost less than gasoline engines but that may be the only cost advantage.
I learned that from my father because I am home schooled. According to my parents, that is not taught to public school students because public school have an agenda and the primary agenda is not education.
Your father sounds very wise. Most people don't understand anything you just said. I believe that 60% of all electricity is created from burning coal. People don't understand that. They just think that electricity is a clean source of power. At a school I went to, the students put up a windmill. The windmill needed a small building to house the expensive batteries, electronics and inverter. If it's too windy, the windmill blades fold back to protect them, and no power is being created. And, obviously, if there's no wind, no power is being created. But in the perfect conditions, that windmill created one kilowatt of power per hour. Wow, that sounds like a lot. Yeah, 10 cents per hour. Assuming wind conditions were perfect for 12 hours per day, it would take 34 years just to pay for the materials to buy the windmill. And that's with free labor. Throw in labor costs and it probably take 70 years to pay for the windmill, and windmills don't last that long. In my city the police department ordered about a dozen electric cars from Tesla. I just don't get that. The cops don't want them, but it makes good for public relations.
@kelleynice A hybrid originally was a car that could run on both electricity and gas. Some of them could be plugged in at night and you could charge the batteries, but not all were the plug in type. I have a friend who has a Chevy Volt. I don't know why, but they discontinued them, and now sell the Bolt. the bolt is fully electric, and the Volt was a different kind of hybrid. The Volt runs off an electric motor, but the batteries are charged with a gas generator. So you still pull up to the pump and fill up with gas, but the car isn't propelled by a gas engine. I don't really get exactly how that makes sense, but she gets 60 miles per gallon. But one thing that could be making that happen is "regenerative" braking. When I go down a hill or just brake in general, all that energy is wasted. The hybrids capture that energy and use it to charge the batteries. It's a brilliant idea and so are hybrids, but the industry is moving away from them and going fully fully electric. But we don't have the infrastructure for that. I believe in my state they said that in 12 years, the sale of new gasoline engine cars will be banned. That will be a huge mistake, but that's how the government rolls.
Your welcome. Auto manufacturers pretended for years that they couldn't invent a hybrid. I'm sure that this was because big oil was greasing their palms to not invent it. Then a teacher and his students in California invented one. lol Oooops. Now the cat was out of the bag and they had no choice but to make them.
Electric cars are very expensive, and the materials to make the batteries are getting harder to come by and more expensive. Also, recycling the batteries is not easy nor completely effective. But many are buying electric cars and shopping malls are often providing free charging stations. However, the battery will only take them so far, and you may be in the middle of nowhere with no charging stations. Plus, fast transportation are needed for many trips and that is normally airplanes. Hard to run jets on electricity, And there are not many air charging stations for prop jobs.
On the ground it is the future, yes. In the air? Who knows. Currently batteries just dont have the energy density to fly a plane of any useful size. But if we electrify the bulk of our ground transportation it's probably fine if all of our fossil fuels are dedicated to aviation. Or maybe we'll come up with better batteries? Who knows. Biofuels are a possible option but again our current options just aren't there yet - especially with the ethanol scam occupying so mich of our efforts. Just because corn was already in most of our fields some dumb politicians got it in their heads to pay farmers for it and sell it as fuel. But corn ethanol is among the biofuels with the worst energy overhead to produce. Not to suggest that can't be improved but there are better options were just not doing because rural Americans control like half the senate and want the quick money instead of doing the responsible thing that would earn them the respect they pretend to shun..
If we cared less about pollution then it would be possible. This whole push to save on resources, consume less oil, and produce electric vehicles makes it all doomed to failure.
It will create more stress for people to move to cities, and push in three directions, the one we're on for logistics to cities, more public transportation within city districts, and possibly your electric bikes, but at the extent of capacitors/dynamos and not batteries. More pedaling as we'll be broke and lacking an industrial sector.
I could see China pushing electric cars, doubly so if Elon Musk gets pissed enough with US red tape and moves literally anywhere else.
Ok so think about this gas prices are up and they will stay there because there has been a bill passed that all car companies have to come up with an electric version of a car within three to five years so the gas companies say we have three to five years to make as much money as we can on the public even though any kind of industrial or manufacturing Place uses oils and fuel to build whatever it is they make so yes everything will go Electric
But here's the thing will you be able to drive them because just think when NATO starts taking over America and all countries and all people are welcome here and there is no more America we don't have rights anymore cuz we are now under the law of NATO that's why I pretty soon you'll be hearing about people trying to get rid of your policemen in your city because they don't want them there they want their own people there so we might not even be able to drive we might be under a communist ruling who knows
The stop point out, with truth, the time of pause A sentence doth require at ev'ry clause. At ev'ry comma, stop while one you count; At semicolon, two is the amount; A colon doth require the time of three; The period four, as learned men agree.
675 opinions shared on Technology & Internet topic.
its a stepping stone.
The maln problems are how the electricity is created to charge the cars battery, how good the infrastructure is for charging your car and how well the battery is built.
Currently there isn't enough green electricity generated. The li-Ion batteries are good enough and create lots of polution in the building process. And you can't charge your car in many areas.
And as a long term solution we must go away from using many personal cars to public or shared vehicles a long with reducing the amount of km traveled.
644 opinions shared on Technology & Internet topic.
the future is the present... and the future is past, that's what I think...
vehicles running on "water" and electricity had been here before, around the 50's or so... so yeah, most of the energies we're aiming for the future, they were actually developed and present in our past
and when I say the future is the present is because those who could lead us into the future technologies, very much rather to keep us here stuck, in the present... so they can make a lot of profit out of our consumerism addictions
For gar scooters motorbikes it makes sense for long-haul heavy duty capacity cars like semi trucks no semi trucks will always need some sort of carbon emission. Electricity isn’t powerful enough to power huge vehicles especially up hills and mountains like the Rockies or of the cascades lava legends are fine because the appellations are tiny Electricity isn’t powerful enough to power huge vehicles especially up hills and mountains like the Rockies or the Cascades the Appalachians are fine because the Appalachians are tiny compared to what we have on the West Coast
@vald9inches nuclear Energy but democratic won’t agree to using nuclear power they want wind and solid which takes more energy then they put out in there entire lives
Nuclear Energy is electricity lol so if electricity can power a submarine through water i am pretty damn sure it can easily power semi trucks or other huge vehicles lmfao. I think what you are trying to say is we dont have the battery technology yet that can be light enough and energy dense enough for large vehicles or airplanes. But thats what the question is asking do you think in the future will we have better batteries and make everything electric.
I agree we definitely should have more nuclear power plants they are the most energy dense, efficient, and safest power source we have at the moment. But i just want to clarify you said that wind and solar can never produce enough energy throughout their entire lives to make up for the cost of energy that was used to make them?
@vald9inches yea it takes more energy consumption to produce windmills and solar panels then they produce in there life time. Nuclear energy really is the most efficient form of green energy. It take welding mining and building and transportation then solar panels and wind turbines produce in there entire life span, which makes them worthless and coast more money and Energy then there worth. Europe is all on board with nuclear energy same with Japan and China (Fuck the Chinese communist party by the way) are all on board with nuclear energy. Before my dad retired he was trying to sell nuclear power to China but because the company wasn’t willing to give up its intellectual property the deal failed. You got to factor in both Energy and financial cost if you are using more energy then the product can produce the product is basically pointless which is why I’m saying it take more energy to produce windmills and solar panels then the energy they produce in there entire life time of use. Sad but true.
Nuclear is way way or efficient then wind and solar and carbon energy combined but unfortunately democratic in the United States hates nuclear energy (sorry given how late. It is I’m guessing your in Europe)
While i agree with you on Nuclear Energy and definitely think we should build more of them, i disagree with you on that it costs more energy to build renewables energy such as wind and solar over their life time that just wouldn't make logical sense not just because they use renewable limitless sources for their energy production aka wind and solar but they would not build them if that is true. i did a quick research on the subject and i found these two articles that refute that claim.
@vald9inches were not going to get off of fossil fuels anytime soon. One of the things climate alarmist don’t think about is there are still many developing countries in the world that still need fossil fuels to develop. China and India are going to stop using fossil fuels now when there just starting to develop. There are other nations primarily in the Middle East and Africans nations who G. D. P relies on the protection and sale of oil. Also don’t for get about the nations that are still burning dung in order to heat there homes at night. Are the developed nations suppose to tell the poorer nations your no longer allowed to burn fossil fuels in order to develop? Oil and carbon based fuels have brought many many nations out of property think it’s only been 147 years since oil was first discovered and the west and other nations that embraced carbon energy have rapidly progressed compared the the entire spans of human history. Also has allowed nations to be able to globally trade with each other on a scale unprecedented in human history. The global markets rely on carbon energy and really can’t really on anything else. Other wise you have people going to war over resources again. Do we want to go back to a world like that?
@Stoner710 While it is true that 1st world countries enjoyed great prosperity and advancement by burning fossil fuels without any regulations doesn't change the fact that humanity as a whole needs to stop burning fossil fuels and transition to something else as quickly as possible other wise our species and civilization will all be destroyed by climate change and global warming. So it is incumbent that those same nations who prospered on fossil fuels need to lead the way with cleaner and more sustainable energy sources and technology and help those other nations with their sources of clean energy otherwise it would be hypocritical. Anything else is just an excuse to keep burning fossil fuels for profit like primitive cavemen especially since we have the technology such as Wind Turbines and Solar Panels and Nuclear and hopefully soon Fusion Energy.
@vald9inches Solar and wind are not going to get us to the point of economic growth that we desire. Stagflations isn’t a good thing. If you spend more to create a product then then what the product produces in its entire life span then it’s no longer worth creating. Wind and solar are not sustainable. Nuclear power is highly sustainable same with natural gas which would make up 10% of our energy if we combine it with nuclear power. So we wouldn’t be 100% carbon neutral but 90% carbon neutral.
I can tell your not from the United States I wish I knew what country your from because every time I bring up nuclear energy it’s get rejected immediately for being to dangerous which is stupid there’s been one nuclear power parent disaster that’s had any significant consequences and that Chernobyl. My dad helped clean up the aftermath of Fukushima he’s helped design nuclear reactors in France Germany and China I was studying green energy massively because I study politics and all that it concerns. So I know solar and wind are not sustainable as fuel for a globalist economy
@Stoner710 well if wind and solar are not sustainable i would highly appreciate any credible sources you have. I would love to read up on them. Yea i facepalmed so hard when i heard that Germany plans to decommission all of its nuclear power plants! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ Also i am not sure if i will be disappointing you by saying i am actually living in americium lol originally was born in the middle east but lived the better half of my life in the states.
@vald9inches So we’re talking express that haven’t been cited because it keeps getting shut down. My dad works for tarra power which is a company sponsored by Bill Gates who is responsible for building safe for nuclear reactors it’s his behind the scenes endorsement of nuclear power nobody knows about it except me and a slight fever of 150 people. He understands that it’s not savannable he also understands that the love doesn’t like make you a power so he’s selling it to every single country other than United States to please the political left of the United States. Most people who are actual scientist allegagree with me that when and solar are sustainable in the long-term short term yes but nuclear power has to be the main part of it. Unfortunately many scientists are against coming out against solar and nuclear and three because he will lose their jobs at this point this is how far the left is gone when it comes to their fear mongering campaign especially when it comes to counterculture
Sorry man I understand your position but until I see some sources I can't in good faith believe what you are telling me. It goes against all common sense I know
It’s already here and should of been a long time ago. I think by like 2050 or something like that all car manufacturers are supposed to either of cut their emissions big time or be all electric or something like that. I agree with it but I don’t know when or how they’re going to ban gas engines. I know automotive makers are doing away with v8 engines and are supposedly coming out with v6 engines that are going to produce like 400 horsepower. It’s a good thing but I already miss my 2stroke dirt bike I had when I was younger and I’m not giving up my hemi as a matter of fact I’m wanting to buy a Honda 250cr like a 1995 give or take a year or two if anyone has one for sale
Not in the US. The National power grid and electrical generating capacity are not robust enough to handle the full load. This can be fixed, but it would take YEARS and cost trillions of $$$$$. Most of these monies will come from increased power bills to pay for all this new construction. It is also going to force an increase in carbon-based generating. Then we have to solve the problem of what to do with old batteries. I might also add you can expect all the states to start sending bills for miles driven because all of the nation's roads will become in fact toll roads. If we stop buying gas and diesel where do you think the road construction money will come from? I make my living as a systems engineer. You can't make changes in one area and not have those changes to affect things in other areas. We can do this. But it will take a long time and a lot of money to get it done. This is why I am not too keen on electric cars, at least not in 2022.
1K opinions shared on Technology & Internet topic.
absolutely no. i find it crazy that after realizing "oil isn't sustainable", we somehow believe that rare earths, lithium, kobalt, copper and so on are "sustainable... specially considerig that most car manufacturers don't even give a shit about recycling the batteries at some point. tesla in particular makes batteries impossible to service and to economically recycle.
and that doesn't even scratch the surface of the entire issue with the generation of electricity and the infrastructure of the grid being far from ready for a large scale transition into electric mobility, not to mention "sustainability" in that field. because as far as we know, nuclear is far more sustainable than everything else, yet people ideologiocally want wind and solar of course, even though those things have their own very individual sustainability issues on top of their base load capacity problems.
so another very short sighted solution for a long term issue.
Not in their current iteration. Too expensive, too many trade offs, not enough infrastructure. We’ll probably see a lot of people swapping to them over the next couple of years, but I don’t think it will last. Gasoline is definitely on the decline, but it’s going to be a much slower decline than people think. Once people realize EV’s are basically going to become the new disposable appliance, you’ll have a lot of holdouts. Especially thsoe who like to work on their own vehicles and people who tow.
For the people that can afford it it's very expensive too buy I own a Toyota Camry hybrid gas and electric thats way more money than just electric it cost too much to make gas powered cars will always be around if someone can afford electric car I guess it's there future transportation the price will probably drop down in the future so everyone will be able to afford it who knows tho all I know everything expensive now or days food, cloth, homes, just everything is sky rocketing in prices it's crazy.
Given that we can't even keep the lights on now with the power generation we have, adding a million or more electric vehicles to the grid will just outright collapse it. Solar polar is unreliable. Wind power is unreliable. Hydro-dams only work for large rivers, of which we have few of. Activists bitch and moan about nuclear power, so we end up with coal instead which is far worse for the environment. All of that leads to a severe lack in electricity generation. You won't be able to charge your vehicle.
Maybe in the future, when you can charge one in approximately 5 minutes. Right now you have to plan your trip so you can stop every 350 miles and charge for an hour or so. The batteries are horrible for the environment. The list goes on and on. Right now we are depending upon fossil fuels to charge them
It is, untill from Nuclear power, Trapps and Bombs wi'll end up in EMP's then you'll see fun, or in winter time batteries go flat, or you can't warm u car more than 30min, couse drains the battery... so.. i see the future an IT WAR! Not a IT evolution, will be like phones/android/apple, soon as the memory is "full" of "updates" that it receives, then you're forced to buy a new one, same withe the Electric cars...
1.1K opinions shared on Technology & Internet topic.
I have been thinking about this for a while. I do not think electric vehicles are the future of transportation. I think that the manufacturing and disposal of the batteries will cause more harm to the environment than burning fossil fuel which you have to do anyway to make electricity.
If everyone had electric vehicles the power grid could not handle them all and would collapse. With droughts and dams not being able to make electricity, it leaves fossil fuel to pick up the slack. But the point of electric cars is so you don't have to rely on fossil fuels. So it becomes a catch 22. Plus where are you going to fill up on a trip?
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions