Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ericd 3607 days ago
How is it not a solution? It decouples transportation from fossil fuels. Yes, the energy can still come from fossil fuels, but it no longer has to. The entire transportation fleet could now be nuclear powered, for example.
1 comments

Because it doesn't address the ridiculous amount of energy and resources spent on private transportation to begin with.

I see many people excited about the fact that electric cars can be powered by renewables, and efficiency gains automation can bring, without acknowledging the downsides of an auto-dominated society.

What it does not solve is:

* The energy spent producing a 2000kg+ car (there's 255 million cars in the US alone, 797 for every 1000 people) [1]

* That that 2000kg+ car in the US is moving on average less than 2 people per trip [2]

* The energy spent moving single commuters on hour long commutes (average of 25minutes each way [3]). I see many comments discussing how drivers will be productive on long automated commutes, while not addressing the inefficiency of that commute to begin with

* The destructive and wasteful development patterns of auto-oriented cities - (sprawl, destroyed agricultural lands, the enormous health costs of sedentary lifestyles)

* The resources required and pollution generated for the production/maintenance/powering of all these vehicles, renewable or not - renewables only produced ~13% of all electricity in 2015 [4]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unit...

[2] http://energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-613-march-8-2010-vehicl...

[3] https://www.google.com/search?q=number+of+cars+in+the+us&ie=...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United...

I totally agree that it's be nicer if we could eliminate cars and build more pedestrian friendly cities. A cultural shift like that is much harder to pull off than a simpler technical solution. Don't let your idealism blind you to the fact that this is a large improvement to the status quo.