Actually, we don't need cheap EVs.
The only thing we really need is less ICEVs
The only thing we really need is less ICEVs
I'm in Sweden, and the cheapest EVs are often more expensive than fully kitted-out ICE versions of the same cars. Even an ardent proponent of EVs will think twice before buying an EV (unless they are rich and live in the city center)
E.g. producing a new BEV can have a worse impact than driving an ICEV a little bit longer.
However, long-term, it is the task of governmental bodies to make the cost using ICEVs reflect the real cost to society, making it probably even less affordable.
And no, "affordable public transportation" doesn't solve the problem. I live in Sweden where you have busses going to even the most remote of places. The farther you are from a big city center, the more yo need a car. And unlike the US being far from a city doesn't mean you live in a big house where you can put your own charging station etc.
> I live in Sweden where you have busses going to even the most remote of places.
Sounds good. I live in Germany where you don't have that, I still don't need a car, even though I use one once in a while because it's so cheap.
> The farther you are from a big city center, the more yo need a car.
So what? Doesn't mean you need a car at the end of the day, let alone own a car, especially when you're not living in the US. It only means cars are more helpful than at the city centre. The same probably holds for your own helicopter
> So what? Doesn't mean you need a car at the end of the day, let alone own a car.
And your proposal is what exactly?
BTW car sharing and carpools have been a thing for a while, including EVs. They are 2x or 3x more expensive than owning a car. And also not available as soon as you move about 10-10 kilometers away from the city center.
I live in a suburb with a population of 60k people, 11 km from the city center. There 20-ish charging outlets (3.7 kW and 11 kW) mostly in paid parking lots (2 EUR per hour after second hour of parking). There are two car pools offering a total of 10 cars at completely ridiculous prices (Volvo's M, I'm looking at you: >25 EUR just to start the car, 30 EUR for 10km purely electric, 27 EUR for 10 km ICE).
> It only means cars are more helpful than at the city centre.
Exactly. They are more helpful, and your proposal is to make them unaffordable for people who need them
> The same probably holds for your own helicopter
Reductio ad absurdum isn't nearly as strong of an argument as you think it is.
You can't pretend that the cost of EVs (both the cars and the infrastructure needed for them) isn't an issue just because you say "ah, they don't need it all the time" or "yeah, but steelman argument is public infrastructure". This just pushes reckoning with reality farther away, possibly beyond the point where it can be solvable.
I am writing from Berlin. We enjoy one of the best public transport networks in the world, but it is still not affordable enough for many and there are still good reasons to own a car in Berlin.
EVs for everyone doesn't work, and ICEVs even less so.
People who really need it for their life style will either have to change their life style and habits or pay enough for it.
And with respect to the economy: supply and demand will solve it
What I meant to express was that the GP was making a fallacious argument themselves by claiming that mine was fallacious when it is not.
Take personal transportation out of the equation without sufficient replacement and the economy (and quality of life, as well as social peace) will take a massive hit, because so many people rely on it for their needs.
Transitions to better models are great if they are planned and executed well. Suddenly pricing people out of their lifes, because required planning and investment 20 years ago was avoided is not a great way to proceed if you value social peace.
What about better urban design so less transit of any kind is necessary?