This is a false choice between huge lifestyle changes for everyday people and regulating the polluters. Regulating the polluters is going to cause huge lifestyle changes for everyday people.
The idea that any of us get to go on as usual is the main roadblock to meaningful climate action.
Or, better yet, people who “love nature”, so they drive an SUV every weekend for an hour to get to a cottage / camp / cabin. Or go camping, or canoeing, or whatever.
I’m cool with that. I also don’t think it would necessarily be huge in terms of inconvenience for the average person because alternatives would pop up before long. For example, if air travel became prohibitively expensive we might actually see an expanse of passenger rail for domestic travel. It’s ridiculous that it’s still cheaper/more convenient to take a 45 min flight (plus the time the whole airport experience takes) vs a couple hours (or less with high speed rail) train ride. Certain plastics might also become too expensive so we might see the return to more sustainable packaging. A lot of the oil and byproduct consumption from the average person comes down to lack of choice ratger than people choosing products made from oil ober alternatives.
It would be a massive inconvenience, but it’ll still be worth it. High speed rail takes many years to build. People hate lifestyle changes. Hell, people will be unhappy at the changes to food packaging. Everything will become more expensive and the economy will contract.
If we go in promising it’ll be easy people will get mad and balk when it gets hard. If we go in explaining how it’ll suck, but that we’ve got a plan to fix the problems and it’ll be worth it then we can succeed
Yeah it may be more upfront, but most people finance any way and your monthly payment will be offset buy your fuel savings.
There’s enough of a stock of used EVs, quite often with low mileage, at this point that cost is becoming less of an issue for people then the perceived lack of convenience. That and dealerships/manufacturers not promoting them because they get less maintenance fees and they’re lower margin then a giant SUV or pickup.
most people at this point chosing fuel over electric, the main motivation is best case “habit” or worst case political statement, it has very little to do with money or the technical limitations of the vehicles anymore. They just don’t like change, they’re scared of it. They have driven a fuel car all their lives and they will continue their habits as long as they are allowed to. The range on EV’s is crazy now. For christ’s sake, an electric bicycle has a reach of 100km! How far out away from what they need do the average 90% of people live… less than a few kilometers.
It’s really not that hard to put a price on societal collapse and the end of humanity: the money it costs to try to mitigate that is infinite and every decision every person makes right now should be made in that light of exponentially higher costs later if bad choices which now seem slightly less expensive are made now…
Yeah. If you’re paying for the car outright, your free cash every month will be higher, which can go back into savings. If you’re financing the car, your monthly expenses will quite possibly be the same or lower, because you pay for gas every month, too.
You appear to not be factoring in the constant costs of fuelling. Those who can rig wind or solar (¿Por que no los dos?) in particular will make up that 10K difference easily over the life time of the vehicle. Using Ottawa gas prices (about $1.73/l) your 2024 Sonata needs about a hundred bucks to fill up the tank. Unless you’re one of those stereotypical “grannies who only use the car to drive to church every Sunday”, the CAA puts the average driver as doing roughly 50 fill-ups per year. That means if you own the Sonata for two years you’ve already used up that $10K difference.
Every refuelling after that puts you into the hole.
And that, right there, illustrates the difference between capital expenditure and ongoing expenses.
Your IONIQ, incidentally, will ideally cost virtually nothing if you can spin up a wind/solar system to charge it. If you have to pay off-peak grid rates, however, you’ll find that for Ontario you’ll be paying about $450 per year charging.
Look into the hidden cost of being poor. I was indeed factoring in this.
The point I’m making is people without money do not have an extra 10k to put in a car even if the lifetime cost is less due to other reasons.
This is also why rich people buy good shoes and they last for a few years. Poor people pay more but buy cheap shoes which have to be replaced yearly.
So I stand by what I say. The actual sticker price of that electric car needs to be the same or less than a petrol car for it to receive mass adoption.
Honestly, I believe the main roadblock is the idea that change will need to happen at all. The sad truth is that most people are fine with contributing to climate change so long as they can keep doing what they’re accustomed to doing.
The only way I can see for meaningful climate action to happen is to get people on board with regulation polluters while allowing them to be ignorant to the fact that lifestyle changes will have to follow, and then when they’re forced to adapt, they will. People are much better at changing when they can’t afford not to than when they have the option to just keep on doing what they always have.
People are also a lot more likely to make sacrifices to keep up momentum after a win like regulating polluters; few people are going to change first when they can see a company like Shell - polluting more every day than they have in their entire lives - going unchecked. A change has to happen to give them hope that the climate can even be saved before they try to make changes themselves to save it.
This is a false choice between huge lifestyle changes for everyday people and regulating the polluters. Regulating the polluters is going to cause huge lifestyle changes for everyday people.
The idea that any of us get to go on as usual is the main roadblock to meaningful climate action.
Well can’t we just ban Shell from selling oil, and then get in our F150s to drive to the airport?
Gotta use at least a 350 to transport one person to the airport
Or, better yet, people who “love nature”, so they drive an SUV every weekend for an hour to get to a cottage / camp / cabin. Or go camping, or canoeing, or whatever.
I’m cool with that. I also don’t think it would necessarily be huge in terms of inconvenience for the average person because alternatives would pop up before long. For example, if air travel became prohibitively expensive we might actually see an expanse of passenger rail for domestic travel. It’s ridiculous that it’s still cheaper/more convenient to take a 45 min flight (plus the time the whole airport experience takes) vs a couple hours (or less with high speed rail) train ride. Certain plastics might also become too expensive so we might see the return to more sustainable packaging. A lot of the oil and byproduct consumption from the average person comes down to lack of choice ratger than people choosing products made from oil ober alternatives.
It would be a massive inconvenience, but it’ll still be worth it. High speed rail takes many years to build. People hate lifestyle changes. Hell, people will be unhappy at the changes to food packaging. Everything will become more expensive and the economy will contract.
If we go in promising it’ll be easy people will get mad and balk when it gets hard. If we go in explaining how it’ll suck, but that we’ve got a plan to fix the problems and it’ll be worth it then we can succeed
BLIMPS
Yes, but regulating pollutors requires a populace that won’t accept anything less. Instead people are placated by paper straws.
Nothing changes until the price of an electric car is less than the cost of a gas one when it comes to the vehicle cost.
A Hyundai Sonata is 35k CAD
A Hyundai IONIQ 6 is 55k CAD
Miss me with that bullshit.
Hyundai Sonata is a budget sedan. Ioniq is their top of the line electric. Perhaps look at Hyundai Inster or Hyundai Kona or something.
Budget 😂. In South Africa the Sonata is one of their largest sedans.
Hyundai Accent is the budget one. Elantra is the mid-size one. I doubt either are available in the US.
Dollar converted, the Accent costs about $12k.
The US car market is so cooked.
Ah yes, you’re right. I just googled the model and read “affordable midsize sedan” in a result.
This is why buying new cars is dumb,
A used Hyundai sonata 2024 is ~20k USD
A used Hyundai ioniq 6 2024 is ~24k USD
Yeah it may be more upfront, but most people finance any way and your monthly payment will be offset buy your fuel savings.
There’s enough of a stock of used EVs, quite often with low mileage, at this point that cost is becoming less of an issue for people then the perceived lack of convenience. That and dealerships/manufacturers not promoting them because they get less maintenance fees and they’re lower margin then a giant SUV or pickup.
most people at this point chosing fuel over electric, the main motivation is best case “habit” or worst case political statement, it has very little to do with money or the technical limitations of the vehicles anymore. They just don’t like change, they’re scared of it. They have driven a fuel car all their lives and they will continue their habits as long as they are allowed to. The range on EV’s is crazy now. For christ’s sake, an electric bicycle has a reach of 100km! How far out away from what they need do the average 90% of people live… less than a few kilometers.
It’s really not that hard to put a price on societal collapse and the end of humanity: the money it costs to try to mitigate that is infinite and every decision every person makes right now should be made in that light of exponentially higher costs later if bad choices which now seem slightly less expensive are made now…
Yeah. If you’re paying for the car outright, your free cash every month will be higher, which can go back into savings. If you’re financing the car, your monthly expenses will quite possibly be the same or lower, because you pay for gas every month, too.
I just looked in Canada
2024 sonata. 28k
2024 IONIQ 6. 39k
I’m sorry I’m not paying over 10k more for an electric car that’s absolutely insane.
Not equivalent, the IONIQ is luxury
You appear to not be factoring in the constant costs of fuelling. Those who can rig wind or solar (¿Por que no los dos?) in particular will make up that 10K difference easily over the life time of the vehicle. Using Ottawa gas prices (about $1.73/l) your 2024 Sonata needs about a hundred bucks to fill up the tank. Unless you’re one of those stereotypical “grannies who only use the car to drive to church every Sunday”, the CAA puts the average driver as doing roughly 50 fill-ups per year. That means if you own the Sonata for two years you’ve already used up that $10K difference.
Every refuelling after that puts you into the hole.
And that, right there, illustrates the difference between capital expenditure and ongoing expenses.
Your IONIQ, incidentally, will ideally cost virtually nothing if you can spin up a wind/solar system to charge it. If you have to pay off-peak grid rates, however, you’ll find that for Ontario you’ll be paying about $450 per year charging.
Look into the hidden cost of being poor. I was indeed factoring in this.
The point I’m making is people without money do not have an extra 10k to put in a car even if the lifetime cost is less due to other reasons.
This is also why rich people buy good shoes and they last for a few years. Poor people pay more but buy cheap shoes which have to be replaced yearly.
So I stand by what I say. The actual sticker price of that electric car needs to be the same or less than a petrol car for it to receive mass adoption.
Now factor in lifetime costs of repairs and gas/electricity!
BTW I have no idea which one is which of your two cars 😅
I bought my fully loaded ioniq 5 for 31K euros Used…
Slate is 25k
K that’s fine
Honestly, I believe the main roadblock is the idea that change will need to happen at all. The sad truth is that most people are fine with contributing to climate change so long as they can keep doing what they’re accustomed to doing.
The only way I can see for meaningful climate action to happen is to get people on board with regulation polluters while allowing them to be ignorant to the fact that lifestyle changes will have to follow, and then when they’re forced to adapt, they will. People are much better at changing when they can’t afford not to than when they have the option to just keep on doing what they always have.
People are also a lot more likely to make sacrifices to keep up momentum after a win like regulating polluters; few people are going to change first when they can see a company like Shell - polluting more every day than they have in their entire lives - going unchecked. A change has to happen to give them hope that the climate can even be saved before they try to make changes themselves to save it.