291
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 140 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

A source that's not the daily mirror: https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-owners-bill-battery-damaged-ev-scotland-weather-2023-10

Daily mirror was already a low quality source, now they even use "ai" to "embellish" the story (read: add fake details).

They added this to the bottom:

An AI tool was used to add an extra layer to the editing process for this story

[-] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 35 points 2 years ago

Thank you, my eyes are still twitching 5 minutes after closing the page 😵‍💫

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 54 points 2 years ago

Thank god there are so many better quality EV choices out there these days.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago

Even better, look into non-BEV choices. Hydrogen cars are now a thing. But people are just weirdly desiring of a BEV monopoly, with themselves as the ultimate loser.

[-] camelbeard@lemmy.world 54 points 2 years ago

Why would you want a hydrogen car and still be dependent on gas stations? I'd rather just charge at home using solar panels.

[-] vivadanang@lemm.ee 30 points 2 years ago

Also, Hydrogen is notoriously hard to nail down in the sourcing - Green is great, blue not so much as it means there's more fossil fuel production somewhere in it's creation. This has led to Denmark pulling back on it's investment in hydrogen infrastructure and closing it's stations. https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/hydrogen-vehicles-in-denmark-left-without-fuel-as-all-commercial-refuelling-stations-shuttered/2-1-1519914

[-] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago

Perhaps people who only have on street parking, and therefore find it difficult/impossible to charge at home.

[-] camelbeard@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Maybe it depends on where you live, but plenty of city street parking with a charger here, not as cheap as using your own solar energy, but still pretty cheap compared to gasoline.

[-] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

I live in East London. There’s are quite a few chargers. There certainly aren’t ‘plenty’ in the context of a large-scale switch from petrol/diesel.

Certainly not entire me to get a plug-in yet

[-] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago

Have no direct experience but from what I saw on YouTube videos, filling an hydrogen tank seems to take a similar amount of time to charge from 30 to 80% a car at a fast 150kw station

Except that you're forced to fill always at 100% and because it requires an operator for security it's not available 24/7

Maybe it's better for a freight truck as it would require the electricity of a small town to recharge with those megawatt charger connectors

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hypx@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

Hydrogen is made from water. It too can be made from solar panels. Though probably from some kind of more centralized system than everyone with their own solar panels.

[-] vivadanang@lemm.ee 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

yeah the reason you're getting these downvotes:

water is made of hydrogen and oxygen. it can be split through electrolysis into it's components through the addition of electricity.

if baseband solar had the capacity you could power electrolysis production of hydrogen and it's been proposed in a few places where solar is cheap and land is available.

[-] Arrakis@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[-] vivadanang@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

yeah science bitches! I honestly had a whole rant fucking raving about how stupid someone could possibly be to think that 'hydrogen is made from water' but walked the dog before replying and let it just go.

I do weep for our future though, because goddamn, I'm a fucking moron. So if I'm the one dishing science to the chuds... we're all fucked

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

Perhaps you should have considered they don't speak English. Consider these phrases. "Hydrogen is made from water." "Hydrogen can be produced from water." "It too can be made using solar panels." "It can also be produced using solar panels." Syntactically, both sets are very similar, but have very different meanings.

Sometimes we need to take a step back and see if there's a legitimate reason people say or do certain things instead of assuming everyone is hopelessly stupid.

*I don't know if they speak English as a first language, a second, or at all. But just given the odd phrasing, I suspect it was fed through a translator. And Lemmy is more diverse than some other social platforms.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Arrakis@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Wait til they find out about dihydrogen monoxide AKA the drink that 100% of people have and eventually die

[-] dan@upvote.au 19 points 2 years ago

I like the idea of EVs because I (and a lot of other people here in California) have a solar system that produces more electricity than what I need day-to-day, so charging the car is effectively free. I don't have an EV yet but will probably buy one next year.

I really like like the Ioniq 5 and 6, but it's kinda ugly at the front and back. I just want an EV that looks like a car, not some futuristic-looking thing.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

FCEVs basically mean the same thing, and it will be viable for everyone and not just the rich.

[-] Player2@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 years ago

Batteries are only getting cheaper and I have never seen a hydrogen station or even vehicle in my entire life.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

You probably didn't see a BEV until the last several years. FCEVs will plunge in cost until they are no more expensive than ICE cars. That will be the real revolution.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

How come you know this?

We've seen pushes for hydrogen, hard ones. And yet ultimately they had to concede that the inherent downsides of hydrogen make them only useful in a select few situations, compared to BEVs that are far better fits especially in the small/commute personal car market where their already short charging duration is irrelevant due to the briefness of the trip.

Not everyone is a professional truck or long distance bus driver where hydrogen can play to its strengths. Even with busses, my city has fully electrified busses with gasoline ones only being used as a backup now. The way they do it is by having a slightly larger spare fleet than normal, so busses can charge while others are running, and then swapping them as a bus nears the end of its lap where everyone has to exit anyways. Intra-city busses benefit massively from regenerative braking, after all.

I mean, do humor me, because I thought hydrogen was a fantastic idea, until I actually read up on it and it turns out it's not actually a very good tech, as cool scifi as it sounds at first.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

I do my homework. It's all about following the evidence.

Toyota has already come out and say that a fuel cell car costs the same as an ICE car to build, at least in theory. But it has very small resource requirements, so it seems self-evident that it is the case.

You don't have to make a compromise. If there's a way to power a car just like a conventional gasoline car, while also being a zero emissions electric car, then there's no reason to oppose the idea.

Most engineers in the car industry actually believe the hydrogen car is the future. And they still do. What you're hearing on social media is just a lot of marketing BS coming from BEV companies. Most of these accounts are Tesla drivers or investors. None of them are being honest.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Toyota has already come out and say that a fuel cell car costs the same as an ICE car to build, at least in theory. But it has very small resource requirements, so it seems self-evident that it is the case.

Isn't one of the big downsides of hydrogen fuel cells the required platinum, even after the improvement of not bonding them to carbon?

You don’t have to make a compromise. If there’s a way to power a car just like a conventional gasoline car, while also being a zero emissions electric car, then there’s no reason to oppose the idea.

Hydrogen is not a zero-emissions thing, and I hope that you didn't pick that up from "sources", because you speak about others going by social media information while - apparently - believing that hydrogen is a zero-emissions system. (neither is BEV, at least not in a well-to-wheel-comparative scenario, mind you)

Most engineers in the car industry actually believe the hydrogen car is the future. And they still do. What you’re hearing on social media is just a lot of marketing BS coming from BEV companies. Most of these accounts are Tesla drivers or investors. None of them are being honest.

What about all the other car companies then, that should have a vested interesent in marketing-wise opposing Tesla, yet even after initial pushes to hydrogen, Toyota and Honda quickly swapped to a near-100% BEV fleet? Wouldn't your logic dictate that if hydrogen was a valid alternative as-is, then companies would lean hard on that as their USP compared to Tesla? Especialy in North America where Tesla is so dominant, but which is also just about the only place where hydrogen vehicles have any existence and hence usable network at all?

Last stats I've seen still had hydrogen at 50%-100% more pollution than gasoline cards while also costing ~2x as much per kilometer for the owner. Of course, in theory all hydrogen can be produced from solar/wind/etc, but:

  • The losses during production and shipping are so big that the amount of energy is absurd.
  • The extra storage and shipping problems are entirely unsolved at the scale personal vehicles would require. Nevermind the further reduction in final efficiency they incur.
  • Right now >90% of hydrogen is produced from methane, as electrolysis is just not a valid source. Without serious technological advancements, switching to hydrogen would actually make things worse.
  • Speaking of making things worse: We worry about batteries in crashes and fires. We mind the pollution from their materials in such cases. Both issues are, at present, worse for hydrogen.

Sure, maybe in 40-100 years, people might scoff at the idea that hydrogen was ever not a valid way of powering a personal vehicle. But at our present technology, all it has going for it is that it sounds quite cool. Hydrogen powered!! 🤘

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Player2@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

Battery vehicles were made the hot item over a decade ago by Tesla... The real evolution would be to get rid of car dependency altogether

[-] mayonaise_met@feddit.nl 12 points 2 years ago

A monopoly is not when a technology is more popular than another technology.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] GenesisJones@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

This is confidently incorrect.

The real answer you were looking for was PHEV.

[-] cedeho@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

ahh yes, hydrogen. They are standing all around at the dealers waiting to be bought. hm? what? you mean Mercedes did still not manage to fulfill the promise of like 2003 of hydrogen car series in 2023?

I know what you are saying and I also like the idea, but BEV are much less complicated and way more adult yet.

Why not both though? and add phev in the mix?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] max@feddit.nl 47 points 2 years ago

Designed in California. Reminds me of the missing rain gutter around the boot of the model 3. When you open(ed) it while it was raining, all the water would pour right into your boot, onto your stuff.

[-] Flabbergassed@artemis.camp 13 points 2 years ago

Then you have wet socks all day

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago

By boot I'm assuming you mean the trunk?

[-] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago

When you say trunk, i assume you mean for swimming?

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

On the model 3, yeah, because of all the rain pouring in.

[-] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

And it comes full circle!

[-] max@feddit.nl 2 points 2 years ago
[-] Andi@feddit.uk 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This seems a bit fishy to me, I don't buy it.

I reckon the couple had done something stupid in the car like drive it through a ~~fjord~~ ford that was deeper than they thought, or through a flooded section of road and actually did submerge the battery. Multiple times.

Then went to dinner. And the car had enough.

They get the scary quote, then decide to omit the majority of the day's activities when complaining to the local newspaper in order to shame Tesla/Elon to pay up.

[-] ntzm@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago
[-] themusicman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

That Tesla's not broken, it's just pining for the fjords

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 years ago

meanwhile with a bike the most egregious surprise cost you can get is if your e-bike gets totalled and you have to buy a new one, which would cost like $1000

[-] deadcatbounce@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago

Tesla is too funny.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
291 points (100.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

41043 readers
1209 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS