autotldr@lemmings.world
on 03 Nov 2023 15:55
nextcollapse
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Norway’s muscular EV push has garnered headlines in outlets like the New York Times and the Guardian while drawing praise from the Environmental Defense Fund, the World Economic Forum, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
Worse, the EV boom has hobbled Norwegian cities’ efforts to untether themselves from the automobile and enable residents to instead travel by transit or bicycle, decisions that do more to reduce emissions, enhance road safety, and enliven urban life than swapping a gas-powered car for an electric one.
The federal government now offers tantalizing rebates to Americans in the market for an electric car, but nothing at all for more climate-friendly vehicles like e-bikes or golf carts (nor a financial lifeline for beleaguered public subway and bus systems).
“The argument is to make the tax system more fair,” said transportation state secretary Kroglund, “and not give benefits for things that are unnecessary for the transition to EVs.” As a result of the new policies, Norwegian sales of some high-end EVs, like the enormous Chinese Hongqi SUV, have collapsed.
The national government’s decision to subsidize electric cars but not e-bikes makes no sense from a climate perspective, although the United States Congress made the same mistake when it passed the Inflation Reduction Act last year.
But if local initiatives aren’t matched with supportive federal policies, Norway’s experience suggests that an influx of electric vehicles can hinder efforts to escape the automobile’s urban stranglehold.
The original article contains 2,849 words, the summary contains 236 words. Saved 92%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
OldFartPhil@lemm.ee
on 03 Nov 2023 16:54
nextcollapse
For the record, the problem in Norway was that government programs to encourage electric vehicle ownership were too successful and incentivized people to drive instead of use transit. Also, the financial incentives for purchasing electric cars mostly went to people who were already wealthy.
Who would’ve thunk that adding just another lane makes more cars appear.
Fades@lemmy.world
on 03 Nov 2023 17:10
nextcollapse
Journalism is fucking dead, what the hell is that fucking title, clickbaiting trash
Jajcus@kbin.social
on 03 Nov 2023 19:48
nextcollapse
But is it a clickbait in this case? The title is exactly the question the article thoroughly answers.
Kata1yst@kbin.social
on 04 Nov 2023 02:25
collapse
But the title also neatly sidesteps all of the nuance that a user needs to actually understand what is happening. But "Norway experiencing unintended consequences from poorly executed EV incentives" won't drive clicks the same way
TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
on 04 Nov 2023 16:33
collapse
I thought the same until realizing it was from Vox, a typically left leaning site.
spongebue@lemmy.world
on 04 Nov 2023 18:44
collapse
So clickbait trash is fine as long as you agree with it?
TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
on 06 Nov 2023 23:27
collapse
Not at all. I realized the title was likely not clickbait. While I agree it was crafted to get clicks, the article does actually follow the title.
Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
on 03 Nov 2023 21:13
collapse
It makes me think about a saying « the best energy is the one we’re not using ».
And also about capitalism, as the EV rise is great for companies as they can sell you an expensive car you’re only gonna own for a maximum of 20 years.
Weather a muscular bike is gonna last forever and only be sold once for a limited amount of money.
They’re only required to make parts for 10 years, and batteries don’t age well.
My current vehicle is 17 years old, has 270k on it, I expect to easily get another 10+ years and another 100k. Even then, I won’t get rid of it, just use it as a spare, so when I or any of my family/friends need a vehicle because there’s is down, it’s available. Our newest car is 7 years old, approaching 100k miles. I expect another 15-20 years out of it.
There are cars in my family that are 30 years old, still running, still getting 30 mpg. Yea, engines have been rebuilt, once, they aren’t pretty, paint is faded, chipping, etc. But they still work fine. Even have AC.
Ev’s are the ultimate in planned obsolescence. If we didn’t have cash for clunkers, lots more perfectly serviceable cars would still be on the road.
Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
on 04 Nov 2023 23:27
collapse
Maybe you’ll be able to do the same with Ev’s. Yes you probably won’t be able to do difficult repairs yourself, but that’s also true with ICE.
Difficult repairs? Like what? Replace an engine? That’s an afternoon. Transmission? Also an afternoon. These aren’t difficult, and a decent local shop won’t charge through the nose like a dealer does.
Modern ICE from Japan are about as easy as it gets.
Average age of cars in my family is 10 years. Some are 30. This across probably 20 cars.
My current vehicle is 15 years old. It’s cost maybe $2000 in repairs in that time. An EV would be on its second battery, heading for a third.
threaded - newest
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Norway’s muscular EV push has garnered headlines in outlets like the New York Times and the Guardian while drawing praise from the Environmental Defense Fund, the World Economic Forum, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
Worse, the EV boom has hobbled Norwegian cities’ efforts to untether themselves from the automobile and enable residents to instead travel by transit or bicycle, decisions that do more to reduce emissions, enhance road safety, and enliven urban life than swapping a gas-powered car for an electric one.
The federal government now offers tantalizing rebates to Americans in the market for an electric car, but nothing at all for more climate-friendly vehicles like e-bikes or golf carts (nor a financial lifeline for beleaguered public subway and bus systems).
“The argument is to make the tax system more fair,” said transportation state secretary Kroglund, “and not give benefits for things that are unnecessary for the transition to EVs.” As a result of the new policies, Norwegian sales of some high-end EVs, like the enormous Chinese Hongqi SUV, have collapsed.
The national government’s decision to subsidize electric cars but not e-bikes makes no sense from a climate perspective, although the United States Congress made the same mistake when it passed the Inflation Reduction Act last year.
But if local initiatives aren’t matched with supportive federal policies, Norway’s experience suggests that an influx of electric vehicles can hinder efforts to escape the automobile’s urban stranglehold.
The original article contains 2,849 words, the summary contains 236 words. Saved 92%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
For the record, the problem in Norway was that government programs to encourage electric vehicle ownership were too successful and incentivized people to drive instead of use transit. Also, the financial incentives for purchasing electric cars mostly went to people who were already wealthy.
Who would’ve thunk that adding just another lane makes more cars appear.
Journalism is fucking dead, what the hell is that fucking title, clickbaiting trash
But is it a clickbait in this case? The title is exactly the question the article thoroughly answers.
But the title also neatly sidesteps all of the nuance that a user needs to actually understand what is happening. But "Norway experiencing unintended consequences from poorly executed EV incentives" won't drive clicks the same way
Perfectly stated 👏
I thought the same until realizing it was from Vox, a typically left leaning site.
So clickbait trash is fine as long as you agree with it?
Not at all. I realized the title was likely not clickbait. While I agree it was crafted to get clicks, the article does actually follow the title.
It makes me think about a saying « the best energy is the one we’re not using ».
And also about capitalism, as the EV rise is great for companies as they can sell you an expensive car you’re only gonna own for a maximum of 20 years.
Weather a muscular bike is gonna last forever and only be sold once for a limited amount of money.
Still, I love cars, so I ain’t perfect…
20 years if you’re really lucky.
They’re only required to make parts for 10 years, and batteries don’t age well.
My current vehicle is 17 years old, has 270k on it, I expect to easily get another 10+ years and another 100k. Even then, I won’t get rid of it, just use it as a spare, so when I or any of my family/friends need a vehicle because there’s is down, it’s available. Our newest car is 7 years old, approaching 100k miles. I expect another 15-20 years out of it.
There are cars in my family that are 30 years old, still running, still getting 30 mpg. Yea, engines have been rebuilt, once, they aren’t pretty, paint is faded, chipping, etc. But they still work fine. Even have AC.
Ev’s are the ultimate in planned obsolescence. If we didn’t have cash for clunkers, lots more perfectly serviceable cars would still be on the road.
Maybe you’ll be able to do the same with Ev’s. Yes you probably won’t be able to do difficult repairs yourself, but that’s also true with ICE.
Difficult repairs? Like what? Replace an engine? That’s an afternoon. Transmission? Also an afternoon. These aren’t difficult, and a decent local shop won’t charge through the nose like a dealer does.
Modern ICE from Japan are about as easy as it gets.
Average age of cars in my family is 10 years. Some are 30. This across probably 20 cars.
My current vehicle is 15 years old. It’s cost maybe $2000 in repairs in that time. An EV would be on its second battery, heading for a third.