[princevegeta89]

No surprises.

No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power.

I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come.

[MBCook]

The number of ICE cars I get stuck behind from time to time that just REEK is amazing. I’m in a decently well off area too.

Some putting off soot clouds, white smoke, nothing visible but clearly not doing complete combustion. Sometimes I wonder if half the cylinders are even working.

I’ve heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape.

I love EVs. I’ve had one for 5 years now, and I’m glad they help. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact.

The pollution from ICE isn’t just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh.

[srmarm]

My city is covered by a low emissions zone so the odd van polluting sticks out. I was in Athens recently and the pollution from so many old rough cars was so noticeable (and quite unpleasant).

Reminds me of how I didn't really notice cigarettes until they were banned from public spaces and the base level of normal was recalibrated.

[Braxton1980]

Many car enthusiasts remove the catalytic converter for a combination of additional power and/or better sound. It has a massive impact on emissions and what you might be smelling is hydrogen sulfide which is normally converted to sulfur dioxide which is orderless.

I should note the power increase may not have a major impact on newer cars where the cat has been optimized to reduce it's negative power impact.

Infact a popular tuner company, APR, that provides flashes tested the recent Volkswagen GTI and R generation with their most common tune and determined that with their tune removing the cat had a nominal impact.

*Basically they can bring the cars power as high as the OEM internals can handle reliably while keeping the cat. There are cars where it still has some impact and of course, different from power ,"straight piping" a car can offer a subjective sound change.

[HPsquared]

I could see a single "bad" ICE car being the equivalent of 100 "good" ICE cars. Even the VW emissions scandal (where the cars were still functioning as designed, just not as well as they should) had instances where pollutants were 35x higher than they should be. So I could see an emissions deleted diesel (of which there are many, i.e. catalytic converter and DPF removed) could easily have more than 100x the usual emissions of noxious substances. Maybe even more! Especially if (as is often the case) the DPF was removed because something is faulty on the engine and was overwhelming the capacity of the DPF in the first place.

You can smell these cars from halfway up the road sometimes, when they're 100 metres ahead.

[adrianN]

Even modern cars pollute a lot (especially in winter) because you need a certain temperature for the cats to start working. On short city trips it happens frequently that you never reach proper operating temperatures.

[m463]

Speaking of smells....

One good thing about driving an EV is that weird oil or hot coolant smells are from someone else's car (and not a problem with your car)

(although yes technically many EVs have coolant loops)

[nine_k]

I'd say that putting off sooth clouds is a way to sequester carbon (which obviously failed to burn). Such over-enriched fuel mixes must generate much more CO though, and I wonder if those who "tune" their cars like so take care about the catalytic converter :(

[dzhiurgis]

> get stuck behind from time to time that just REEK is amazing

It’s crazy. How do we even allow selling cars without HEPA filters.

[Hikikomori]

We have mandatory inspection of road vehicles almost every year and we measure exhaust as part of it.

[cucumber3732842]

White smoke is water vapor. It's a normal byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion and tends to condense in the exhaust at low loads or immediately after exiting the exhaust, especially in colder temperatures, so you'll see a lot of it in stop and go traffic.

[tonymet]

tragically, because of efficiency standards, modern engines are known to burn oil .

Otherwise you may be smelling cars who have had the cats stolen.

[andsoitis]

Besides the crap they pump into the air, they also excrete gunk onto the road. It’s so primitive.

[maxerickson]

The exhaust from a well functioning modern ICE is likely enough to have less pollutants than the air. Of course it still has carbon dioxide, but less other pollutants.

[jordanbeiber]

Even if we still make a mess I think centralization of the mess is better than distributing it - what I mean is that polluting cities where millions sleep, eat, drink and breathe will probably be worse, net effect, than containing energy pollution to select places.

Running EVs in densely populated regions is probably a lot better for the population on the whole even if the net pollution would stay the same, IMO.

Still no EV is even better, but we’ve created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess.

[unglaublich]

Even if the electricity source would burn similar fuel, just the fact that you don't pullote right in the middle of population centers makes a huge difference. In reality, it's not only that, but _also_ that they use cleaner methods of energy production.

[kakacik]

This is only the issue if you are a city dweller and want to spend your whole life there. For rural folks this is actually best possible situation.

The pollution always goes somewhere, and its not like we have large swaths of useless places that we can pollute without consequences.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again

FYI, if you want to search for this, it is called "The long tailpipe" theory (1) or "long tailpipe fallacy".

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe

And it is a fallacy for obvious reasons, including

a) electricity generation is more flexible, and rapidly shifting to solar and other non-polluting sources.

b) Moving pollution away from people is better. Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.

c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.

d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions."

[SecretDreams]

Even if the fossil fuel argument at the source was/is valid, it's infinitely more efficient to do it at the source than in a car. You can extract far more energy and do better to mitigate byproducts.

[tetha]

Also, an EV is as green as the grid. Hamburgs public transportation is heavily investing into electrical busses, because a bus is expected to function for 10 - 15 years. Meaning, a diesel bus built today will be as polluting in 2035 as it is today, though they are also looking at alternatives there. But an electrical bus will become cleaner and cleaner over time.

[omoikane]

The surprising part to me is that there are now enough EVs to make a measurable difference, since I kept thinking they are still relatively rare. The linked study has this piece of data:

    From 2019 to 2023, ZEVs increased from 2.0% (559943 of 28237734) to 5.1% (1460818 of 28498496).

So 1 out of 20 cars in California is an EV.

[justaboutanyone]

It really feels like more than 1 in 20 driving around the 101/280

[ninalanyon]

Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 3 in Norway.

[ErroneousBosh]

We're still burning massive amounts of fossil fuels as waste products from refining oil to make plastics and chemical feedstocks. A huge amount of that is propane that just gets flared off.

We could have been running cars on that for decades, but getting people to make their dirty polluting inefficient old petrol cars run on fuel that emits carbon dioxide and water with no HC, CO, SOx, NOx, or particulates was nowhere near as profitable as selling them lots of debt to buy cleaner greener diesels.

And we're burning the fuel they'd run on anyway.

[paulryanrogers]

Compressed propane is explosive, more so than liquid gasoline or batteries. Though batteries do burn hot and are hard to extinguish.

[psychoslave]

That's framing the topic completely out of the issue with global impacts of humanity on ecosystemic sustainability, including biodiversity.

Less commut and more collective transportation is going to be far more significant in term of global impact, whatever the engine type.

[yen223]

You can do both! Better trains and more EVs replacing gas cars can be done simultaneously!

[JamesTRexx]

Decent public transport makes all the difference. Luckily we have good transport here in the Netherlands and I haven't needed a car in 10 years. Also, the trains here have been running 100% on renewable energy since 2017.

[ares623]

I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon. I cannot and will not own a smart car any more I want to own a smart TV or smart fridge or smart toaster.

[SloppyDrive]

Post crash connectivity (as well as complex video classification) are part of the ncap standards now.

And with the way we are moving to centralized one system architectures, the device that does video processing can be the same soc that does smart infotainment.

Smart connectivity essentially comes "for free" if the manufacturer wants to hit 5 safety stars, so its not going away, and will come to ICE cars as they modernize the vehicle architectures.

[jayd16]

We'll probably see the death of the dumb ICE car first.

[girvo]

Amusingly my Cupra Born in Australia is a “dumb” EV, because Cupra/VW didn’t put a SIM in the car in this country. It’s quite lovely really, though it means I have to go to Cupra for a firmware update.

[rootusrootus]

The differentiating factor is not EV vs ICE. All cars have or will soon have telematics and such.

[stevenjgarner]

Why? Are you worried from a liberty/privacy standpoint? "Smart" EV's are demonstrated to be significantly safer than "dumb" EVs. Waymo’s 2025/2026 data shows an 80–90% reduction in injury-causing crashes compared to human drivers in the same cities. [1, 2, 3, 4]

[1] https://www.reinsurancene.ws/waymo-shows-90-fewer-claims-tha...

[2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305169/

[3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39485678/

[4] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Swiss-Re-h...

[alephnerd]

> I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon

What business case is there for a "dumb" EV?

By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen).

This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars".

Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot.

[0] - https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automot...

[RobGR]

I have hopes that the Slate vehicle will turn out to be a dumb EV, but I'm cynical enough that I want to wait til it hits the market and someone does a tear-down. https://www.slate.auto/

[pilingual]

Slate, or pull the cellular connection: http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/ev/offnet.html

[conk]

Just get a used one that’s a decade old. The cell providers will all move on past 3g/4g etc and the cars won’t be able to connect. Plus I’m sure no one is paying to keep a cell connection going for a decade old EV.

[tshaddox]

Are EVs more “smart” than comparably priced ICE vehicles?

[mnot]

We just bought a Cupra Tavascan; turns out VW Group Australia decided to forgo connected car features for EVs (or at least the ones we looked at).

Win.

[shmoe]

Have you met https://slate.auto ? :)

Doesn't even have automatic windows.

[ebiederm]

Does the 2026 Nissan Leaf meet your criteria for a dumb car?

All it's connected features appear to come from Android Auto or Apple Car Play. AKA from a connection to your phone.

I like the looks of it because it appears to be a serious EV unlike too many which are just some company getting their toes wet.

[rgmerk]

Not happening any time soon, sorry. Car manufacturers want that sweet sweet subscription revenue.

[shiftpgdn]

Just buy one and remove the SIM card.

[tombert]

I don't love smart TVs either, but why not just buy a smart TV and not use the smart features? I have a few "smart TVs", but I haven't even connected them to Wi-Fi, and I instead opt for an Nvidia Shield TV or just a laptop computer plugged in instead.

[thegreatpeter]

Have you been in the new Model Y? I was all for the „dumb car” until I tried one of those. Never going back.

You only want „dumb” bc the other car companies fk’d it all up.

[rainsford]

Even if the source of electricity used to charge an EV is mostly generated by fossil fuels, EVs are still probably more energy efficient because gas powered cars are not particularly efficient at turning gasoline into useful energy compared to the efficiency of larger scale power plants.

Also as you point out, non-fossil fuel energy is becoming a larger part of the grid over time, so an EV you buy today will become cleaner over time, while the fossil fuel reliance of a gas car purchased today will never improve.

Honestly the biggest blocker for EVs from my perspective is charging infrastructure. Public fast charging sites are too uncommon compared to gas stations and a less than ideal solution to use for all of your charging needs and lots of people live in housing where installing a charger at home is difficult or impossible. Eventually both of those will change, but it will lag significantly behind the quality of the vehicles themselves.

The interesting thing to me is that even for people who can't charge at home, EVs and charging infrastructure have reached the tipping point where they're at least viable. They're less convenient in such situations than a gas powered car and so will be limited to people who are extra motivated for one reason or another. But the EV world is over the "possible" hurdle so the "practical" threshold seems inevitable.

[IngvarLynn]

I'm all for EVs, but half of PM10 pollution is independent of engine type as it comes from brake and tire wear: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JR...

So direct environment impact is still huge for EVs and calling them ZEV is literally a scam.

[paulryanrogers]

Don't EVs use resistive breaking to recharge their batteries? I would hope that reduces particle emissions.

Though I suppose that EVs and hybrids are heavier than similar gas powered counterparts, so tire wear is worse. At least until EVs can be made lighter.

[testing22321]

You mean we can do something today that will reduce PM10 pollution by half?!

That’s fantastic news!

[catketch]

scam is a bit of hyperbole. also, ZEV has always explicitly referenced tailpipe emissions, which is also why there's been the odd sounding "partial zero emissions vehicle" category. It's certainly valid to be concerned about additional sources of fine particles, but eliminating engine emissions is not something to be dismissed as a scam.

Further, particle emission from brake dust is mitigated in EV's that use regen braking. One of my ev's can go days without phycical brake usage, and another uses the brake pads so infrequently it has an automatic mode to touch the discs occasionally just to keep them from building up rust.

tire particles --- different compounds can effect that, but will always be a side effect of tires on vehicles.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

Yes, that's why regenerative braking, which only EVs have, is so useful.

[spooky_action]

Aren't fossil fuel plants much more efficient than ICEs for emissions per unit energy extracted?

[Loudergood]

Yes, a coal powered EV will be cleaner than the same vehicle burning gasoline under the hood.

[DyslexicAtheist]

> I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come.

for this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE. I don't see this. On top of this EVs tend to push ideas from Software/Tech companies, such as recurring revenues (because the underlying technology lends itself to it better).

Personally I'm unsure that this will be accepted by all consumers as much as is needed. After all the automotive marketing has since Ford insisted that driving was about "freedom". So some pivot needs to happen in the messaging. Suppose decades is a lot of time to change it. Personally I think EVs are nonsense, and a better utopia would be making sure public transport is abundant, high-quality and free.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> For this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE.

Define "improve" ?

One way for "ICE cars completely become a thing of the past" is for there to be lots of cheap, reliable, second-hand EVs. If you can buy a good used EV for less then yes, a barrier to quitting ICE cars has been removed.

That's an improvement. The car doesn't have to be an asset, it could be more like a utility.

EV depreciation seems to be driven by

1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and

2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfounded

https://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...

https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif...

[cbeach]

Public transport will never recreate the freedom of car ownership.

It’s a collectivist dream not rooted in reality.

[kemiller]

Even if you power a typical EV from 100% coal, it pencils out as about equivalent to a late model Prius. And any improvements in the energy mix take it further.

[cosmic_cheese]

I don't think many people really understand how awful automobile-scale internal combustion engines are at efficiency. The only reason they work at all is thanks to the absurd energy density of the fuels they burn.

[chaostheory]

> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again

I would argue that this provides us the possibility of energy flexibility, which is a good thing given the current global geopolitical situation

[dyauspitr]

We are about 2-3x battery capacity to never look back at ICE vehicles ever again. That or 5 min to 80% charge times with current capacity.

[neogodless]

The current generation of Lucid, BMW, etc. are 400+ mile vehicles.

You think we need 800-1200 mile batteries?

As for charge speed, the twice a year someone needs more than 400 miles isn't as significant in real world EV usage...

I plug in on a dopey 1.3kW (~115V, ~12A) outlet and my car is at 80% charge in the morning. For commuting, a 5pm to 7am charge is ample for most people living ordinary lives.

[groundzeros2015]

> No surprises.

What about all the resources and people used to develop the cars?

[dymk]

Six months break even and then it’s more carbon friendly than an ICE for the rest of its working lifetime

[chaostheory]

It’s probably still more net efficient in the long run. Besides, the main advantage EVs bring isn’t being more environmentally friendly. The main advantage is that it allows a nation to have more flexibility with its energy sources. i.e. an EV can run on anything that can generate electricity like coal or natural gas, while ICE cars mostly only run on gasoline.

[girvo]

Now do the same for internal combustion cars. What a silly argument.

[otabdeveloper4]

The pollution and grime that cars produce comes from tires rubbing off, not exhaust. (The exhaust pollution is mostly invisible.)

Electric cars are heavier and produce more tire grime.

[memen]

Is that true? EV have much higher emissions of micro plastics and pfas (or variations thereof) due to increased tier degradation. EVs are typically way heavier than similar ICE due to the batteries and combined with the higher torques, tires wear faster.

[jwr]

> EV have much higher emissions of micro plastics and pfas (or variations thereof) due to increased tier degradation

I find those claims highly suspect: I own an EV and haven't had to change the tires more often than I did on a gasoline-powered car. My EV bought in 2021 still runs on original tires and they're fine (although I do change from winter to summer tires, so that's 2 sets technically).

I suspect black PR, and there is always a grain of truth in black PR: emissions are indeed likely to be higher. Probably not "much higher" and probably not in a way that really matters.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

While it is true that EVs are heavier than the equivalent ICE vehicle, and that this causes more tyre and road wear.

1) this is not the only or even the overriding factor when comparing the two. There are engine emissions (none for EVs) and braking (EVs have regen braking)

2) There is a trend for larger, heavier ICE vehicles in the USA as well. Big trucks and SUVs. It is very selective to argue against EVs in this way without also arguing against these.

[cbeach]

I have a heavy and high performance EV (Tesla Model S) and I have replaced my tires twice in the last six years. So it’s about the same as an ICE vehicle in that regard.

One thing that differs is brake wear. My car is ten years old and still on its original brake pads and discs. The regen braking is amazing for avoiding mechanical braking. So that means less particle emission from brakes, compared to ICE.

[raverbashing]

It is amazing the amount of bs and grasping at straws that the oil company will push to keep their amazing polluting stuff going on

No I'm sure fracking and pipelines and all the crap the oil industry needs just to exist does not have any pfas or micro plastics