The anti-vax people will find a way to ruin this for everyone else.

Just like they managed to kill a US soldier and get about 200 of them sick simply by changing the rules so that the soldiers do not have to get vaccinated.

No no you don't understand. Every suburban road warrior commuting into a job in town is actually an outdoorsy manly macho man who spends all the time in the wilderness on unlit roads hauling mysteriously large loads without so much as a 5 minute pee break every 26 hours.

Why do you hate America?

This is about the 5th time I remember someone saying they found 'signs' of alien life, and it never is.

No the solution is that people shouldn't be driving around in dildozers.

Normal countries have tried to decrease pedestrian deaths by making things safer. The Land Of the Free decided to decrease deaths by making it so incredibly hostile and dangerous to pedestrians (the method of transport that requires no government intervention unlike driving) than you decrease the number of pedestrians. Didn't work though. Despite slashing the number of pedestrians the number of deaths is on the increase.

It's fun to call them wankpanzers or urban tanks but an actual MBT has better forward visibility:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TankP...

Indeed, this has been well known in Europe for many years, and rules put in place to mitigate the problem.

Not enough. They're getting taller and squarer because people want cars that look more aggressive, macho and powerful.

It's very square fronted with a high bonnet and poor forward visibility.

Compare to a small chassis/flatbed van. They typically have more slope on the front and the driver further forwards to give much better visibility

Do you know anyone who is religious? I doubt it. In your blue bubble of New York City or California, you are judge of anything about anything else in the country. May you should actually visit America.

Indeed. We should also, however, recognize that emissions reductions can never get us to net-negative CO2 and that is where we need to get. We should be investing heavily in research into carbon capture and sequestration, because it is the ultimate long-term solution to greenhouse gas emissions, the thing that will allow us to actually reverse global warming.

In the meantime, as you say, we should start by looking at the CO2 emissions sources that allow us to most quickly and cheaply reduce our emissions. The easiest area is electricity production... made even easier by the fact that wind and solar are the cheapest technologies we have for producing electricity, in many cases even when the cost of battery storage is included. And of course as we convert electricity production to non-emitting sources, we should electrify as much as we can the other areas where we burn fossil fuels.

But we also need to be investing in carbon recapture, because some things are going to be hard to convert and, as I pointed out, only recapture can get us to net-negative. We should also be researching geoengineering techniques, such as methods of reducing insolation. Geoengineering isn't a solution (e.g. reducing insolation does nothing to fix ocean acidification), but it may be a necessary short-term measure, and we should be prepared, having already done what we can to understand it in case we need it, and before we need it.

Carbon reduction is good, but it's insufficient and I worry that we're not putting enough into other approaches. A large part of the reason is that people are afraid that attention on anything other than carbon reduction will harm the emissions reduction efforts. That's not a ridiculous concern, but it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the scale and scope of the problem.

There are always conditions about things when you get subsidies. Sorry, but I grew up in the hood and thought 'Gee, I need to do something that will give me social mobility' and I did - and those would also likely be things that WERE in the strategic interest of the United States. We have a middle class that in what seems to be a huge number of cases thathink they're British Lords and Ladies and don't need to worry about anything so gauche as having to worry about earning a living. I'm so glad I grew up poor, I never had that particular piece of stupidity. Like all humans, I have enough others.

Bill Gates invested in one of the covid vaccines and made a ton of money. He passed it off his charity but when it came time to make the patents free that's strangely didn't happen. None of these fuckers do real charity any more than Trump did. It is always a scam and a grift.

If you gave 20 bucks at a grocery checkout you've given more of your income or hell more real money than any billionaire has ever given the charity in their lives. That's raw dollars that's before we talk about all the money they diverted into their pockets

How often do you adjust your side mirrors? For me, it's once and then leave it there the rest of the life.

Indeed, this has been well known in Europe for many years, and rules put in place to mitigate the problem.

I think you're reading too much into the parent's comment. He didn't frame anything other than price, and he's right. If all you have is DC fast charging EVs are the same if not more expensive than their ICE counterparts.