The value add for an individual is minimal to nonexistent in electric vs gas. Not so with a horse vs a car. This guy is delusional if this isn't just hype (it is) and thinks the comparisons are comparable.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
I don't drive a lot any more now that I work from home...but if I purchased an electric vehicle, the batteries (arguably one of the most expensive components of the vehicle) are slowly degrading whether I drive it or not, and I would either have to throw away the whole car or replace the extremely expensive batteries as early as 10 years (assuming the company who built it still exists). If I buy a gas-powered car instead, there is not a significant expensive component on it that starts totally degrading over time whether I used it or not...except the 12v battery under the hood that I have to replace every 5 to 7 years.
That Rivian CEO is suffering from affluenza and seems to think people are made of money.
It's called a stable. And if you keep horses then yes you need to build one.
Haven't read the article yet, but the quote irks me. I live in a home built in 1920 by a rural "house doctor" with a barn and stalls and all that jazz. Electric may be the future, but gas cars will still be around a while. The same way horses didn't immediately disappear from rural areas when cars became affordable.
I don't want ev, I prefer more hybrid maybe even hydrogen.