• m0darn
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh yes, I forgot about how brake dust is burning towns to the ground because of extreme weather and inundating low lying regions with rising sea levels.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you seriously think a community called “fuck cars” is trying to defend gasoline cars over EVs? This is a public transportation gang good sir, madam, or otherwise.

      • m0darn
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The community no, but individual commenters yes. Blogs like carbuzz, yes.

    • SkepticalButOpenMinded
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I was talking about tire dust being worse than brake dust. Was that a typo?

      Literally no one is arguing that EVs aren’t better for the climate than ICEs. But a lot of the climate harm of cars is not just tailpipe emissions, but bad land use. Pavement, parking lots, urban sprawl, are major contributors to climate change. I don’t understand this idea that if we push to move away from cars, it will encourage ICE use. It’s an inane argument.

      edit: I also haven’t seen studies of how much air particulate matter from tires contributes to the greenhouse effect. I don’t doubt it’s still better than ICEs, but it could still be significant.

      • m0darn
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You said tire pollution is potentially worse for the environment than tailpipe emissions. That is a wildly irresponsible thing to say. That’s what I was objecting to.

        There absolutely are people arguing that ICs are better for the environment, as if climate change doesn’t affect the environment.

        If you’re going to buy a new car, don’t, but if you’re going to buy one anyway, prioritize reducing of ghg emissions.

        Edited: changed “euphemistically” to reducing, my fault for not proofreading my auto correct (I use swore typing on my phone so sometimes things go really sideways)

        • SkepticalButOpenMinded
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then you’re responding to the wrong comment. The comment you’re responding to is one where I say that tire pollution is worse than brake pollution. In the thread where I say that tire pollution can be worse in some ways than tailpipe emissions, I specify that EVs are still better than ICEs for the climate.

          So you’re responding to a comment where I didn’t say what you claim I said, while accusing me of holding a position I don’t hold.

          • m0darn
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t think I’m in the wrong comment chain, and I think I commented before you clarified re climate change.

            Also I’ve edited one of my comments explaining a really weird auto correct replacement i didn’t catch, which may explain why you feel I’m accusing you of things.

      • mayoi@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        EV’s aren’t better for the “climate”.

        Petrol will always be superior, and when we can’t produce anymore, it will be time to go back to wood gas. EV’s will forever be toys.

          • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hey, this guy you’re arguing with is a troll, although you probably already figured that out. He declared yesterday that he lives to be an asshole and spends his time mostly picking fights and deflecting the ones he’s losing. Just thought you should know that you’re engaging someone who doesn’t argue in good faith

          • mayoi@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Thanks for observation that noone asked. I don’t need to argue in a topic where one fact ends the “discussion”.

            EV’s are full of unrecyclable garbage, same with your shitty solar panels and wind turbines, you know nothing and therefore it’s pointless to argue with you, so I’m not going to do it.

            • SkepticalButOpenMinded
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not sure what you were expecting. It is not unreasonable to ask for actual reasons to support your ideas, especially hot takes like “petrol will always be superior”.

              • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re not going to get actual reasons. This guy is a troll. He has spent the entirety of his day old account picking fights and deflecting the logical retorts. Just thought you should know

                • Forbo@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Let me know when they actually close the loop on that. Right now it’s just externalized by dumping it all into the atmosphere.

                • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  👆 This guy is a troll. He’ll say whatever he can to get a rise out of people. He doesn’t argue with any sort of consistent logic and just deflects once he can’t figure out what to say next. Not worth engaging