this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
1104 points (96.3% liked)

xkcd

8839 readers
7 users here now

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Alt text:

An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that's the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

"when you are empty, and you have to drive right away, its faster to refuel your car with petrol"

My relatives dont have a charger at home, they just plug their car into an outlet, and get ~40km range over night. That more than enough for the daily commute.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

And my relatives don't have personal parking spots.

Poor people's time gets no respect, because the rules are made by rich people with tons of time conveniences and they just aren't conscious of how the other half lives.

They ban our shopping bags, failing to realize that for someone with a car and a garage, a disposable plastic shopping bag doesn't have much utility over re-usable bags, or dispsable paper bags. But for a person with no car and no garage, a disposable plastic shopping bag means they can carry like three in each hand and walk miles home in foul weather.

And if you want to just bring bags with you in advance, you gotta carry them with you all day.

It's doable, don't get me wrong. But it's more of a hassle. And the amount of hassle that it adds is far greater for poor people.

I rent a car for Uber. I'm working up to buying a car, but until I do I have to rent. Uber has decreed that all rentals must be electrics. To save the planet. The electrics cost about $100 more per week to rent than the gas cars did, and as a poor person I can't charge them at home because all I have is street parking.

This means that every day I work driving for Uber, I have to stop about once a day to charge the car. So that's about $25 a day I'm losing to charge instead of refuel my vehicle, so $125 a week I'm losing and then the other $100 per week it costs because it's a special car, I'm losing $225 per week due to this decision.

So I'm doing my part, but unwillingly. And I strongly, strongly suspect that the people who made this decision at Uber, that their contribution to climate action was going to come out of my cut, didn't think the cut would be so big because they live in houses or in fancy apartment buildings with chargers.

I just feel like nobody talks about how time poor poor people are. We lack time just as much as we lack money, and when we get new rules imposed on us that take up more of our time to comply with, the people creating the rules don't realize how must time it's costing us, because their own lives are relatively time rich. Many of the forms of their wealth come in the form of time conveniences, and those change the equation. They think the electric car's hassle consists of having to charge it occasionally on long trips, because they have a home charger.

Just across the board, we need to be aware of the time cost of these changes, and also to be aware that the time cost is often many times higher for poor people than it is for middle class people.

[–] deczzz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago

Overnight isn't "right away". "I have to get to y right away!" "Sure! I'll just charge the car and you can leave tomorrow!".

Listen, I'm not saying that EVs are shit but they are currently not my cup of tea. It's just all this BS. Of course it's faster to refuel a car with petrol than to charge a battery. Would you also deny that it's faster for me to fill up a glass of water than you charging your phone? I ENVY the great fuel economy that EV owners get. This sucks for petrol cars.