Hacker News Reader

Comment by Affric | Hacker News Reader

> I refuse to live my life as if these things aren't important to me. I refuse to average my entire life style down to my median day. My median day is boring.

Well said. And I think that you cut to the heart of what the electric vehicle advocates are doing wrong. They are telling us the only times we actually enjoy being in the car and travelling are the ones we should give up.

I don’t use a car in the city. An electric car can’t yet take me home in 2 days without perfect conditions and a tailored root.

View on HN

As an ordinary driver, I cannot care less whether a car is electric or not. All I want is *A* car can cover all most if not all my needs around transport. Obviously those electric car advocate took what we *want* as what we *need*.

Oh those duplicitous monsters! Unlike those sincere marketing folks that spend their lives manipulating the multitudes over what their needs and wants are!

I wholeheartedly agree and am also going to bring another thing up that ICE cars have but EVs don't regarding range:

Peace of mind.

When we're driving an ICE car, we simply don't care about the range. We don't think about it; it's not a concern. That peace of mind is fucking priceless, especially if one's life is already busy with far more pressing concerns.

In an EV we have to constantly keep an eye on that battery level, on that Miles Remaining counter. We have to micromanage the A/C and other things that consume power. That is mentally draining, and for what? It's something we don't have to care about in an ICE car.

I drove an EV, I constantly worried about the range. Range was constantly on my mind, even when I wasn't driving the fucking thing. It was mentally fucking exhausting. Sincerely: No thanks.

I'll happily pay the $50~70 bucks at the gas station to fill up my car in a few minutes and be at peace. It easily beats paying almost nothing charging overnight and then worrying if I can come back home when I start another day.

Don't EV cars calculate all that for you and tell you where to stop to charge up again?

Only Tesla does that.

That seems weird.

Edit: Just looked up Porsche and they have it too. They call it "Intelligent range optimiser". Can't be asked to check more brands.

That is false.

This integration didn’t exist when the EV versions were just electrified versions of ICE cars.

This changed with the upcoming of car by traditional automakers that were designed to be an BEV first. I’ve used the route planning in a Kia EV as well as a VW EV without any issues. You can plan your route with charging points, select the desired remaining capacity, select the kind of charging you want, etc. AFAIK Porsche offers the same features too

My Renault Megane E-tech will tell me the battery % when I reach my destination, and will ask me to add a charging stop on the way if I won't make it. My previous BMW i3 did the same.

I’m afraid these calculations are more tuned to sweetheart deals the car manufacturer has with the infrastructure owner than to my best interests.

Tesla will 100% route to Tesla chargers, which is what you want to use right now. Maybe in 5 years it will be worth thinking about other brands.

My 10 year old EV has a button on the steering wheel that will show all the chargers it knows about within range.

If planning a route using the built in satnav it will say "you won't make it, add a charging stop?"

But there's so many chargers I don't even bother planning.

How can you have peace of mind whilst burning the only inhabitable planet for life as we know it?

It brings peace of mind, it seems.

If you've been raised in a deeply individualistic culture, the collective well-being doesn't affect your peace of mind. And if you can afford to choose to own an EV, you and your descendants will likely be amongst the least impacted by climate change, migrations, and supply chain disruptions.

Hah, so true. If you give up on your ICE now in one of the western democracies, it will be sold as a used car in your country first and continue being driven around by someone poorer, then eventually be shipped to Asia and be driven around there by even poorer people until it eventually goes to Africa and and be driven until it finally gives out. Getting a new EV and dumping the ICE won't change much on that in the short term.

So what I want to say is, that poor people have better things to worry about than EVs and sustainability, like getting through the day with food on their plate and maybe a roof over their head. While they will be the most impacted, they can afford to care about it the least.

Also, EVs right now just shift the problem around until we manage to produce electricity from renewable sources, which is still some way off, especially in the poor places that will drive the least efficient ICEs while they last.

In France we have a "bonus for scrapyard" to avoid that [1]. You get an extra discount if you prove that the old car you're replacing is going to be removed from the road.

I don't think it's well thought through given how broken the rating of cars is, but that's a step in the right direction I guess.

> Also, EVs right now just shift the problem around until we manage to produce electricity from renewable sources

Until we manage to actually reduce the amount of cars. The solution for transportation is quite clearly less and smaller vehicles, all EVs.

[1] https://www.economie.gouv.fr/particuliers/prime-conversion

If you are broke you can buy a normal car for $1000 or less, that can get you to work and back home. You can't afford to live where you can take public transit or a bicycle to work. Electric is simply not an option for the majority of people, it is a luxury. Until a worker can get an electric car for a couple of thousands, no scrapyard bonus will make any difference whatsoever. It's just more tax money subsidies for rich people.

>Until we manage to actually reduce the amount of cars. The solution for transportation is quite clearly less and smaller vehicles, all EVs.

That's called a motorcycle, although they're not electric. There's a few hundred million of them already in the world, and greater adaption of motorcycles where possible would be incredible for reduced traffic and reduced pollution. On top of that they are cheap, fuel efficient and fun to ride. But nobody will listen to the solution, because there is too much money to be made from the problem.

> Electric is simply not an option for the majority of people, it is a luxury. Until a worker can get an electric car for a couple of thousands, no scrapyard bonus will make any difference whatsoever. It's just more tax money subsidies for rich people.

Note that "the majority of people" don't have a car, they have 2-wheeled vehicle at best. [1] I'm not conflating "electric vehicles" with "electric cars".

> That's called a motorcycle, although they're not electric.

No shit.

> There's a few hundred million of them already in the world, and greater adaption of motorcycles where possible would be incredible for reduced traffic and reduced pollution. On top of that they are cheap, fuel efficient and fun to ride. But nobody will listen to the solution, because there is a too much money to be made from the problem.

Fully agree, even though the maximum amount of public transportation is in my opinion desirable in areas that permit it.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/04/16/car-bike-...

> I'm not conflating "electric vehicles" with "electric cars".

My mistake!

To add a bit more to the discussion. Larger adaption of motorcycles instead of cars in cities can also reduce the pollution from public transport. Nothing spews more exhaust than a bus stuck in traffic. Motorcycles are also a good complement to public transit, since you can get to a station or terminal that is far away on your motorcycle and easily park there. Car parking needs much more space. In many cases it is better to get to a terminal that has express public transport by your own means, so that you don't have to live by the local bus schedule and wait for the slow route to the terminal.

Good point for the buses, I wonder which is more energy-efficient in-between putting all passengers in a battery-electric bus or on electric scooters.

The main advantage I see to electric motorcycles is that you barely need to change anything in most car-dependant areas to start mass adoption. They are fast enough for you to not feel unsafe next to cars at a red light, and can go quite far on a single charge.

I've been raving about Taiwan's Gogoros for a while, but still, too many motorcycles is a big safety hazard. Electric bicycles are much better in that regard, muscle ones even more.

I think both ICE and electric motorcycles will be more energy-efficient than both ICE buses and electric buses. But not everybody can ride a motorcycle, so my thought is that if more car drivers became motorcycle riders, then traffic would flow much better and the bus wouldn't get stuck in the first place.

It would also save a lot of money on infrastructure, if traffic could be improved without having to build larger and larger highways.

As for electric and muscle bicycles, I think they have their time and place. There's nothing wrong with people combining all methods of transportation in their life, depending on circumstances and weather. Car + MC + Bicycle could be in everybody's garage.

I wouldn't consider many motorcycles a safety hazard. It's mostly people riding like lunatics. And safety gear has become better recently, with airbag clothes. At least bikers only hurt themselves in an accident. In my experience motorcycles are safer than electric bicycles, unless you're in a place with very good bicycle infrastructure. Motorcycles can accelerate out of dangerous situations and have better manoeuvrability than large-wheeled bicycles.

Motorcycles pollute far more than cars per unit of distance driven.

And I’m talking about gas cars.

And cars carry more people.

The fact that motorcycles use less gas has absolutely no connection to how much pollution they produce, which is a lot.

Good to know, I had no idea of that! But it seems to be fixed with a cat without too much downside in performance. From my quick research, it seems that most modern motorcycles do have cats, and they don't add very much to the price of the vehicle.

Cars carry more people, and more stuff. And it protects you from the weather. But if you're just transporting yourself or yourself and a passenger, the motorcycle can be a good option many times.

Thanks, good to know they have “cats” too, didn’t know that. Hopefully it helps a lot. For the record, I assume what I’ve heard about motorcycles does not account for that.

EVs powered even by coal pollute less than gas cars, due to superior drivetrain efficiency. So this “long tailpipe” concept you allude to is a myth.

> If you've been raised in a deeply individualistic culture, the collective well-being doesn't affect your peace of mind.

I don't know about that. It certainly affects mine. I may not be representative of the average person in my culture, but I was a product of my culture regardless.

As an aside, you can get a Model 3 for less than a Toyota Corolla now in many states so the “if you can afford an EV” perspective is starting to lose its edge. However I still agree with your overall point.

If you're not using a train you're burning the only inhabitable planet as well. So stop feeling superior to others while doing the same crap they all do.

Tragedy of the commons. Your decision to abandon ICE car will not change anything in the grand scheme of things besides inconveniencing you so long as other people are allowed to use ICE cars and a myriad of other fossil fuel based conveniences.

Until enough people abandon them and gas stations stop selling gas, and range anxiety becomes a thing for ICE vehicles.

I think this depends a lot on the EV infrastructure around you.

Driving an EV in the SF Bay Area is super convenient -- I know all the chargers off the top of my head and maintaining enough range is second nature to me now. I regularly road trip my Model 3 as well without any issues. I don't even look at the miles, just battery %.

I recently got an ICE car for fun on the weekends and thinking about gas, oil changes, preventative maintenance, and repairs has been way more stressful than charging.

Give the infrastructure a few years to catch up. Now that NACS has taken over in the US, things will only get better.

I live in super rural South New Jersey. Even here where I don't see many tesla there are plenty of super chargers.

Infrastructure is there, people just have a fixed notion of what the infrastructure looks like.

Even our least populated states are littered with fast chargers alone highways and interstates.

When I bought my model 3 in 2018, infrastructure was good enough in Idaho the meet my needs, though there were a few tight gaps.

Now in 2024 the picture has dramatically changed with every route having excess charge capacity and options.

Those down on EVs are having to come up with ever more convoluted scenarios and routes to justify why they aren't feasible. I literally saw one where a person posited they needed to drive from Edmonton to Winnipeg Canada every day during the winter and because an EV is a bad fit for that situation it's a bad fit for everyone.

I've not driven an EV, so I can't speak to that. But I have been in an ICE car that has run out of petrol (it was truly sitcom-worthy, with the infamous line "Don't worry, it always shows empty when it's got a 1/4 of a tank left" about a minute before the engine died), and this wasn't that far out from Sydney, and there are signs around here (east coast of AU) with how many km/minutes the next fuel stop is after the current one, so I'm not convinced that EV range concerns can't be managed in a similar way.

They're usually managed even better. (Some) EVs are pretty good at estimating actual range and can automatically tell the driver where the nearest charging points are.

The really good ones can also check if there are free slots in the chargers and optimise accordingly.

Eh, given the same set of parameters, I have trouble believing a driver who let an ICE car get that low on petrol would've taken the steps necessary to manage the battery charge for that trip.

Also, the fuel consumption of an ICE is going to be much more consistent and predictable especially later in it's service life.

The missing context (which I skipped) was that they had two identical(ish, I couldn't tell the difference, they were the same model though) cars, and the other one did have that behaviour (having witnessed it), I suspect the cause was confusion about which car the different members of the family were using that day. It was also on the way back (so no-one was that stressed about it), so waiting to get back to Sydney would have given much cheaper petrol (NRMA came and gave us enough to get back out of the mountains after 30m).

You never* run out of fuel twice though.

*hyperbole

Which one did you drive?

When my ICE car is getting low on fuel, which happens quite often because the tank isn't that big and I tend to avoid filling up when the prices are high (they vary a lot here), I also have to micromanage the A/C and anything else, because they consume just as much energy as they do in an EV car, and that comes from the gasoline. It's most definitely not something I "don't have to care about". It's actually more of a concern because when my car is low on fuel it's very hard to know exactly how much is left - is it half a liter, two, or three? There are way fewer fueling stations than in the past, so getting there also takes fuel. At least with an EV I could have charged at home or at work or at the shopping mall.. well, I'll stay with my ICE car for a while more but that's because there are other good things about it which aren't yet available for EVs, but I do wish it was an EV.

This is purely your behaviour though, the more general case is that most people dont have to micromanage their ICE vehicles or be concerned about range. Especially in the case where they are doing extended driving trips where even fuel can be scarce jerry cans are easy enough to pack.

But my point was that A/C and all electric appliances also affect fuel consumption of ICE cars, and if, for any reason, you're low on fuel you have to take that as much into consideration as with an EV car (except that it's often much harder to gauge how much you have left, with an ICE car).

Of course the AC affects range on ICE cars, but nobody cares about that because there's always a gas station around the corner or at the next exit.

You are the exception. That's what all the replies are trying to tell you

That's probably true in the US. Not around here, in a semi-populated region of Europe. It's far shorter to somewhere to charge than it is to a gas station. There used to be lots of them, but they started to disappear even before EVs were a thing. For me the nearest one is quite a bit away, through a toll booth even.

If you provided that context, you would not have gotten such incredulous replies. Btw the US isn't special. I'm in India right now and there's a petrol station around every corner just like there's a gas station around every corner back home

I assure you that this is not normal behavior. Furthermore, why would you consider paying more ($10k to $20K more!)[0] for an EV if you're trying to time the market on gas prices and worried about spending a few cents on running the A/C?

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38864408

That was not my point at all, the point was that, unlike what was implied in what I commented on, usage of A/C and appliances don't matter for ICE cars, which is not at all true. Energy use is just as for EV cars and has to be taken into consideration. In any case, pricing is different in various places - I own an ICE car, and I have always bought low cost, used cars. That place doesn't currently exist in the EV market.

Hah, if only you've seen me in my ICE car. Plenty of hoping and praying the glimmering fuel light doesn't die out and that I'll make it to the fuel station. No peace mind of mind.

Range anxiety is a short term condition, you get over it after surprisingly quickly. Then you just enjoy driving as normal. Managing charging is easy once you get used to it (in Europe, at least). Actual owners of modern EVs do not micromanage like you claim, you just don't need to.

Personally I prefer paying almost nothing (in fuel) for a nicer drive with far less maintenance worries.

> Range anxiety is a short term condition

> I prefer paying almost nothing (in fuel)

Both of these look like very dependent on the personal situation. In my case I never really got over the winter induced anxiety (the range dropped severely for my expectations), combined with the lack of home charger, combined with high electricity costs, combined with the fact that I can walk, cycle, or take public transport for most of my needs. I eventually returned to a cheap, small, ICE car that I use occasionally but serves for peace of mind (it's there!) and makes me just as comfortable as an EV makes you. I wouldn't recommend to you a bicycle or even a small car because it's very important not to generalize to others based on my needs.

Did you have a heat pump? Did you have a car with 300 miles of summer range? The situation these days is far better than what it was but the infrastructure is still catching up to support those without home charging. That does make it more effort, I do not deny (I did it for a bit).

Of course all transport ownership is dependent on personal situation. That really goes without saying, just look out the window! I didn't recommend anything, to do so would be daft.

I simply do not believe range anxiety is still the problem it once was.

> The situation these days

I gave it up and switched back in November 2022. While I always keep my options open and an eye out for what makes sense for me, I haven't seen any signs that the situation is radically different in general. It certainly hasn't changed for me personally.

> I simply do not believe range anxiety is still the problem it once was.

Maybe but that says very little. If your waiter told they don't believe the soup contains anywhere near the amount of spit it once did you wouldn't feel encouraged. I'm happy if the situation is improving and if I still care about owning a car in the future I'll surely reassess if that critical threshold was reached. Anything short of that will get a "very good, keep up the good work" but not my money.

I hope you do try again because the soup can be spit free, cheaper and tastes better. You do need to pick the right flavour, though.

> Range anxiety is a short term condition, you get over it after surprisingly quickly.

My partner has had a series of EVs for 10 years now.

Just a few weeks ago dropped me off at the airport (~100 mile roundtrip) and started planning for it days it advance. How much needed to driver on day N-2, N-1, how much charge would be left. Then spent the morning of the trip sipping coffee at Whole Foods to bring the charge up to %100 (normally limited to %80). Then spent the whole trip hyperfocused on the mileage remaining, worried about getting home.

While the trip is quite a bit shorter than the advertised range, with hilly terrain it's always uncertain what the real world mileage ends up being.

It all seemed very exhausting. So I guess it takes more than a decade to get over range anxiety.

If you are hitting 100 miles range, then you do indeed have such a small range you need to hyperfocus. A modern Y or 3 will always do 200 miles without a threat. I charge to 70%, and I wouldn't even top up before doing a 100 mile rountrip.

Which goes back to.. more range REALLY DOES help. 100 vs 200 miles range is game cahnging. 200 to 300 would be huge for road trips. 400, 500, starts to hit some diminishing but non-zero returns.

Agreed. I've driven an EV for over 4 years and range anxiety vanished after the first few months. I live in a city with good charging options, but often have to take longer road trips to see aging parents who live in a very rural area with zero fast chargers for miles around. Yes, I need to do a top-up charge on the way down because I know I can't charge when I get there, but I'd likely have to do that in an ICE car because there are no petrol stations near them either!

I pay about 15% of what I would have previously paid for diesel, and the only maintenance I've had to do was a new tyre after running over a nail.

This will get better as the charging network gets built out more. And the experience is completely stress free in some cars with a good network today.

There's an alternative though, at least for those who need an everyday car with low range and do big trips in rare occasions: renting a car when needed.

When my car gets damaged, even if it is a 1mm strach, I get to decide when to repair it, if at all.

With a rented car I need to take a full damage insurance just in case a tiny scratch is visible.

So it's part of the cost. Most people travelling long distance fly and rent a car at the far end.

Would you pay an extra $500 a month to avoid having to spend $1000 renting a car twice a year? Probably not, so the question is how much more does it cost to not rent the long distance car.

And I've never rented a car where a 1mm scratch would require fixing, nor a 1cm scratch

You're lucky, I have, several times in Germany, where some dealers come with a ruler measuring them, plus km limits per day.

Enterprise's guidelines is

    Bumper Damage IS: Dent/scratch larger than 6” (size of the damage evaluator), or hole/tear of any size

    Exterior Body Damage (Non-Bumper) IS: dent/scratch larger than 2” circle, or hole/tear of any size

    Glass Damage IS: Any ‘Star’/crack

I suspect companies like Europcar, Hertz etc would be similar.

Even that, in term in term of cost it's not much. And what's the likelyhood of scratching the car? (It never happened to me with rentals)

I’m Italian, emigrated to the Netherlands and happily car-free.

Ever since Covid happened we rent one for 1 month a year in summer and drive to my in-laws, and further down in central Italy. Overall clocking ~3.5-4k km.

We rented all types, ICE, hybrid and BEV with no noticeable difference: while with the Model Y we had to stop N times to fast-charges and a snack, with the ICE we’d stop anyway to rest, drink or use the toilet even on a half-tank.

Range anxiety is a thing, but it’s over after a couple days.

It’s just FUD, BEVs are ready

Netherlands and mainland Europe is hardly indicative of the types of road trips you would experience in Africa, Americas, Australia

And now you have identified the real problem which has to be solved. And it possible at least in the USA.

Yeah whatever. It’s where we burn several millions of barrels of gasoline per year, stuff that should be kept in the ground instead.

Frankly the amount of Nirvana fallacies in this thread is indicative of the coping stress the petrol-heads are suffering.

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/gasoline_consumpti...

Even if we swapped every ice vehicle for electric and had the charging infrastructure in place, we wouldnt leave all that oil in the ground. Its just to useful, it would be used for plastics, chemical feedstocks, fertilizers, insecticides, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, etc... All those hydrogen carbon bond we dont have to pay the energy for are just to danm useful and valuable for so many industries to leave in the ground.

It’s a solved problem in the US at least, as long as the car you buy comes from a manufacturer with a good fast charging network, of which there is currently exactly one. Australia is well on its way to being solved for most trips.

Yeah but what about continents other than Europe?

Everywhere in Australia is far away. I'm actually pretty keen on getting a Plugin Hybrid for where I live, we often go on 400KM+ drives into national parks or into state forest areas that get more and more remote as things go on.

Should we structurally stick with ICEs in EU and the US because everything is far in the Australian Outback and for that once in a lifetime road trip in the US?

> It’s just FUD, BEVs are ready

Have you tried going to the mountains in France? Or anywhere not on the main roads, even? I mean actually traveling around, not just taking the highway across.

My ICE motorbike has a range of around 300 km on the highway, around 200 in the mountains if I'm enjoying myself. I've had range anxiety with it to the point I now cart around extra gas. None of the gas stations I visited had any kind of charging available (outside your regular outlet, but it's unlikely the attendant will let you hook up your car to the outlet inside the office – if it's even open).

Not everybody has the same usage patterns as you do.

> Not everybody has the same usage patterns as you do.

Sure, but keep in mind that bikers riding on the rolling hills of the French countryside are a significantly smaller demography than the millions driving across the highway infrastructure.

Absolutely. But that doesn't mean we should push everybody to ride electric bikes just because those riding in remote places are few and far between.

The feeling I get whenever these discussions come up is that there's a distinct lack of nuance, and a tendency to shove a one-size-fits-all solution down peoples' throats, even though the solution might only fit-most. I get that it's easier to reason with absolutes, and that sometimes some people may need a nudge to take the jump. But I also understand being pushed like this with no apparent concern for peoples' situations can make them close down to the argument, even if it could actually make sense for them in the end.

People complaining about range anxiety are usually told "nah man, it's just FUD!" Maybe it is just FUD even for a sizable portion of those complaining, but just dismissing their concerns out of hand doesn't seem like a good approach.

And this isn't just a bunch of people on a random discussion board. It's actual policies being enacted affecting peoples' actual lives.

Talking about France, in a few years' time my motorbike won't be allowed inside Paris (where I live). I rarely use it. I'd really love to see the proof that building and buying a new one, to replace the one that is in perfect working condition, is actually better for the environment. Especially given that the newer model which complies with the current pollution standards consumes the same amount of gas as mine (judging by the manufacturer's specs). Of course, this law is stupid because it only considers the year the vehicle was sold, but it's just one example of many why people may have a knee-jerk reaction to being forcibly pushed to adopt new things.

Sorry but I’m not that sorry for your bike.

https://wmo.int/news/media-centre/2023-shatters-climate-reco...

This year we visited the Dolomites and the weather was insane. The place was full of old photo's of meters high snowfalls but all they got this year was a couple centimeters in early December. We need to change our habits, this pace is unsustainable

https://wmo.int/news/media-centre/2023-shatters-climate-reco...

So you're saying that trashing a perfectly good bike and building another one, only to be ridden what? 10000 km at most a year, is a good deal for the environment? And consume the same amount of gas, so put out the same amount of CO2? My bike was an example where the general one-size-fits-all solution is actually counter-productive.

This is exactly the issue I'm talking about.

I'm all for preserving the environment, I really am. And I think that moving the immense majority of (sub-)urban commuters from ICE to EV is great and will make a difference. Or, even better: stop commuting if possible!

Isn't the mantra "reduce, reuse, recycle", "in that order"? How are we reducing or even reusing here?

But this whole "replace all ICE vehicles now" just screams of disguised "won't somebody think of the economy?"

Electric is quieter, so many people you probably would never even notice or be aware of, who are out there seeking a peaceful direct experience of the mountains, will appreciate the absence of your motorcycle in that respect.

Also you make a common mistake of motorcycle owners in equating the amount of gas consumed with the amount of pollution. Smaller engines are by far vastly more polluting per kilometer than larger ones.

Which is saying something even worse than saying their per-litre pollution is bad since motorcycles get more kilometers per litre. In other words even with their better per-kilometer gas usage, they still pollute more per unit of distance travelled. That is truly bad, from a pollution perspective. It’s a mistake to think the small amount of gas used means there is less impact.

So your motorcycle should be trashed, yes.

I would also love being able to ride a quiet motorbike. One of the reasons I have my specific model is that it's very quiet. I'm not against EV bikes, mind. I'm talking about practical issues, here, and saying that as of today, electric bikes' range combined with the existing infrastructure would have a hard time replacing ICE bikes.

I'm all for your considering that I shouldn't get to enjoy the mountains, but please, come out and say that, instead of dancing around the subject and saying that a newer ICE bike would be just fine. The argument just loses credibilty.

> Smaller engines are by far vastly more polluting per kilometer than larger ones.

How small are we talking, here? My motorbike's engine is bigger than many modern ICE cars' (I'm in Europe, so big-ass V8s aren't that common).

Be that as it may, you seem to ignore what I'd say is the most important part of my argument: I'm not complaining that I wouldn't be allowed to ride any bike. I'm complaining that the powers that be figured that a newer bike, with the same weight and similar sized engine (smaller, actually! – so more polluting?) and the same gas consumption is somehow better than my older model, and I should be allowed to ride that and not the one I already have.

Yeah I see what you're saying, it would suck if they forced you to change over abruptly. And if you have a bigger engine as you say the pollution is probably less of an issue. In any case the pollution picture is getting massively better as EVs roll out and I'm guessing the transition period will be long (as long as the lifetime of your current bike, maybe).

Then one would hope we will have swappable battery pack options for motorcycles in the future as well, which could make refueling more widespread. Easier to do for motorcycles than cars. And with a smaller battery by necessity, swapping makes more sense. Anyway I'm just rambling on here, who knows what will happen.

As far as you getting to enjoy the mountains, I had (maybe mistakenly) been thinking you were talking about a dirt bike, versus a road bike. I don't think of the sound of road bikes as annoying to anyone, especially a quiet one. Not quite as Edward Abbey would say, "if there's a road there, the place is already ruined" but definitely you get more leeway to make noise on a road.

> Absolutely. But that doesn't mean we should push everybody to ride electric bikes just because those riding in remote places are few and far between.

The situation you described is purely recreative. Others might argue that the climate is much more important than the personal hobby of a few motorcyclists and would warrant banning ICE vehicles altogether.

One can change recreational activities easily.

> I'd really love to see the proof that building and buying a new one, to replace the one that is in perfect working condition, is actually better for the environment.

I am with you on that one and I believe that if all this wasn't an hypocritical way to save the automotive industry, the governments would push and force car brands to develop and sell homologated EV conversion kits for all cars builds in the last 30 years.

The endless focus on hobbies involving ICE misses the forest for the trees and has pitted tons of large hobby communities against environmentalists for decades because many environmentalists would much rather pick a fight with car guys than with the inter-global corporations and the defense forces that actually make up most of the worldwide emissions pool.

International shipping is single-handedly the greatest contributor by a small margin, tons of which just does not need to happen, full stop. We send products around the entire world because it costs pennies less to package pineapple in one country than another, and most of it goes in the fucking garbage anyway. And the products that do require shipping could be done in a much, much more efficient manner to save tons and tons of ship traffic per year. The other major contributor is industry, which could be trimmed significantly if we put serious work into ending the production of stupid, useless, shitty items that no one actually wants (knockoff electronics, basically anything drop-shipped, single use fucking lithium phone chargers).

And all that's not even going into shit like the FIELDS of e-bikes and e-scooters being stacked in China because there's just nowhere to go with that.

Military dick-wagging especially but not solely by the United States accounts for absolute shit-tons of CO2 going into the atmosphere, too, absolutely none of which needs to happen. Military vehicles, construction vehicles, LTL trucks, service vehicles like garbage trucks: this is where we can make big dents in climate change. Not by taking away Jerry's Corvette that does, at best, 10k miles if he has a good year where he gets in a lot of track time. As far as I'm concerned this is just the "check your carbon footprint" garbage with extra steps: blaming consumers for the state of the environment while completely letting off the dozens of multi-national corporations actually holding the power and making the decisions that are collapsing the biosphere.

We are talking about things that are not mutually exclusives.

Certainly, but it's a matter of priorities. I recycle and minimize my consumption of useless goods, and all the rest. These are unambiguously good things to do. But at the same time, going after people for their recreational hobbies just because said hobbies are not something you find personal fulfillment in is shit activism when they are barely enough to be considered a rounding error in the larger problems of climate change.

If at some point in the far flung future, things like dirt bikes or even track monster race cars owned by folk turn out to be the biggest environmental problem, fine. Then we'll deal with it. But from my perspective we have an entire ocean of fish much bigger and far more worth frying first than them.

I felt compelled to mention the hobby vs need situation because it used to be one of my hobby too but I also acknowledged it wasn't necessarily a smart thing from my part.

Now despite still enjoying riding a motorbike I am doing more recreationnal cycling and only transportation focused motorbike riding[1]. I just embraced moving a but slower. Turns out that with a simple bicycle you can get way enough thrill in the downhills, and with much less risks. As an ex elite road cycling racer, I am no stranger to catching and overtaking cars and motorbikes descending mountain passes.

[1] I basically only ride my motorbike if I have my partner with me and I am going to a specific place we wouldn't be able to make it and back home within a time constraint.

Not the OP but I have been to the Pyrinees and Dolomites in my Model 3 and was perfectly fine. Many, maybe even most of the small villages had at the very least a 50kw charger somewhere on them, often at a hotel or supermarket. I don't think I've ever been further than 100km from a fast charger.

NL? Sul serio? A completely flat tiny country?

The much longer stops translate into needing to sleep at a hotel rather than being at your destination. You clearly haven't accounted for that either.

NL, hai letto bene. I don’t know what to make of this statement though.

I’ve clearly accounted for everything dude, including my own endurance and that of my family: every couple hours we need to get out, stretch, have a coffee and use the toilet. Plugging a DC 150kW takes 2 minutes, and we were never stuck in a queue waiting for that.

In any case the worse time wasters are roadworks and traffic jams on the German highways and the abysmal wait at the Gotthard Tunnel. If not for them I could easily make it in one day with a Model Y

> Plugging a DC 150kW takes 2 minutes

More like 2 seconds in a Model Y.

Yeah, I have to say I’m dumbfounded by the brilliance of the UX.

all other designs where you have to present a card are simply a failure

Why not claim that it's completely 0 emissions (on 100% downhill trips) while at it?

You realise that you weren't in a queue because there are very few EVs around I hope?

Hotels can have electrical outlets. Not to mention chargers which are often faster than electrical outlets. Long trips in huge countries are easy peasy. Charging stops are like 10 minutes every couple hours and sometimes 20 when someone goes in a store for a few minutes. The long charging stops you are thinking of are non-Teslas.

I like how you completely forgot that a night at a hotel costs you 1 day of vacation, plus the cost for the hotel itself.

Most healthy people don't need toilet breaks every 2h, and you're not accounting for the line at charging spots. 10 minutes * 5 cars isn't a short stop really.

There are no lines though. And you are making things up. There is no need for a hotel. As an example, a recent long trip I took in a BEV (Tesla) was 1442 km in one day. No hotel needed. How is that a bad thing? Are you going to tell me that is a short distance?

95c/kwh at rapid chargers in Italy this summer, that's over €800 to recharge for your journey compared with petrol at €1.80, which would be about €400.

no man, 21€c/kwh at Tesla SC stations outside Italy, something x2 in the country. Besides, gasoline was outrageously priced last summer, an epic gouging.

Please, enough goalpost pushing

Paid 95c at several rapid chargers along the A1 between Florence and Naples in August. 65c in towns at slower places. 45 was the cheapest I paid.

I agree with you as that's my reality as well, however the original article is about the US market so the discussion here is for a US context and for them, as far as I understand it, their infrastructure is a lot poorer so the concerns are far more justified.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com