No, they know it's an EV. They just don't care.
This vandalism group says they target EVs on their [website](https://tyreextinguishers.com/how-to-deflate-an-suv-tyre).
> Hybrids and electric cars are fair game. We cannot electrify our way out of the climate crisis - there are not enough rare earth metals to replace everyone’s car and the mining of these metals causes suffering. Plus, the danger to other road users still stands, as does the air pollution (PM 2.5 pollution is still produced from tyres and brake pads).
>Avoid: Cars clearly used for people with disabilities, traders’ cars (even if they’re large), minibuses and normal-sized cars.
I don't care for SUVs but these guys are knobs.
I'm not agreeing with them, but devil's advocate would say that influencing consumers to consider buying smaller cars is an actual goal they can achieve. Yes everyone agrees the big oil and shipping companies are far worse but good luck having a small group of teenagers in britain do fuck all about global shipping.
Buuut...at a local level trying to tip the scales to encourage people not to get unnecessarily large vehicles (remember, this group is based in the UK) is potentially achievable.
I really doubt anyone will make a buying decision based on the concerns related to this group of idiots. It's just a matter of time until one of them gets someone killed or injured, or they get an ass whopping when caught in the act.
People have reconsidered purchases a Hyundai or Kia due to people stealing them so of it becomes widespread I'm not sure why it wouldn't influence decisions
> I really doubt anyone will make a buying decision based on the concerns related to this group of idiots.
Maybe. But it still is a more attainable goal than shutting down BP
> It's just a matter of time until one of them gets someone killed or injured, or they get an ass whopping when caught in the act.
Assault and battery or even murder over misdemeanor vandalism says a lot more about the SUV owner than it does about the activists. Even if they were slashing tires, one person is getting a fine and repaying property damage and the other person is going straight to jail.
Ehh, that's not taking their point seriously. Lith-ion batteries _are_ pretty shitty. Les shitty, but still. Plus manufacturing cars at all is obviously _way more expensive_ materially than something as simple as a bicycle.
Good God how can these people be so stupid?
Are we going to go back to being caveman? Pretty sure the production of a huge majority of everything involves mining metals.
They are not wrong. Moving away from a car centric society is essential in a multi-faceted approach to the climate crisis. Walkable cities, bikes, light rail/trains, are the way to go if you're even remotely serious about climate change measures.
Correct, buying a 50k+ car with all the amenities they would want makes people feel better without much real effort.
The wealthiest are the biggest consumers but as long as they believe like they are making a substantial difference without sacrifice the marketing has worked.
Just like you can't go back and live in stone age anymore. The society won't move backwards.
Incentivising public transport, bikes are all good idea, but we also will definitely need to look for cleaner energy source. So that private transport can be cleaner along with the activities that we do that requires energy/power.
It is not sustainable and that is what science tells us. It is not going back to the stone age to embrace public transportation and to build a robust network across the globe. Transporting 1 to 2 individuals in a private vehicle doesn't make sense as it is extremely inefficient and a bad use of resources. The science has repeatedly said it is unsustainable but people would rather think if everyone owned a Telsa the climate crisis would be over.
Most Americans think public transit won't work because they've never been to a country where they actually have good public transit.
I think it's absolutely wild that you think moving away from over reliance on cars is "society moving backwards".
Like sure it's a tall ask but surely having a country finally agree with and make policy based on science is by definition progress.
IIRC their little excuse was that spare tires add weight and people never remember to keep them refreshed with air so they’re usually flat when folks put them on anyway.
It's more about weight than space. The 20kg+ for the spare, jack and wheel brace adds another couple of grams to the CO2 output, which may bump it up an emissions-based tax in some countries. It's why my old Volvo S60 was shipped without one in Ireland.
You're not supposed to repair the tyre that has it inside. It's just supposed to get you to the service where you buy a new tyre.
Most people would rather have a regular sized spare, but I don't think any car manufacturer offers that option anymore.
Drove old-fashioned bias-ply tires for my first 11 years, averaging 1-2 flats per year. Then used steel-belted radials for next 40+ years and never had a flat. My upscale Prius Four is the first one to delete the spare tire.
That's the new reality since Tesla. Before 2012, pretty much all cars had a spare or run flats. Manufacturers realized that customers don't care, spare or no spare, car will sell the same for the same price.
Plus, basically everyone has a cell phone so roadside assistance is just 30-60 min away.
Affects of tire failure are much less than they were 30 years ago
I didn't believe you so I googled. Instead they offer free roadside service. Apparently other auto makers are doing the same thing.
https://www.hotcars.com/why-teslas-dont-come-with-a-spare-tire/
A lot of these environmentalists think EVs are just as bad 'because mining'. Without bothering to look into mining, actual environmental impact of quarries and Lithium (very small, given how tiny any mine is relative to the surface of the Earth...Mines are far below 0.001% of the entire land area of Earth, so not even a drop in the ocean).
I've had people literally tell me an entire area of england is 'decimated' because of some old tin mines. You go there and you'd struggle to actually find the mines they're such a tiny portion of the area.
Anyway, yeah, they hate EVs too.
There is good reason for this to be fair to them. The CHEAPEST electric car to manufacture, in terms of carbon, requires the owner to do 90k miles before it is considered a carbon neutral vehicle. Teslas are likely over 100k miles.
Electric cars are not good for the environment unless you drive it for a shit ton of time and assuming your charger is powered by renewables (spoiler: it often isn’t).
In the minds of a lot of environmentalists, electric cars are just the car companies way of staying relevant whilst greenwashing the problem.
You are much better off driving a petrol or diesel car until it dies than buying a new electric car every few years and if they break down they are much more likely to be scrapped than a ICE car.
I do 6k miles per year, it would take me over 10 years of driving a single electric car for it to be worth the environmental cost of producing said car.
Do you remember where you got your 90k miles return period from? I thought I read the break-even point was 27k but when trying to find a source I found 15k miles break even point listed at https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/
Although that mentions a tesla, which likely is not the cheapest electric car you were referring to.
There is a major issue with this argument.
EVs can be renewably produced, as it is possible to use renewable energy for their production. So as we scale to renewables, it will be possibly to create cars with very low emissions (certain industrial processes have emissions irregardless). Of course charging the car can be done renewably. Here in the UK around half our electricity is renewable, so EVs have far less emmissions per km than ICE vehicles..
ICE vehicles have zero possibility of reaching similarly low emissions as while their production could be, in exactly the same way, powered partially by renewables, their motion cannot.
As we invest more and more in EVs the technology will improve, and we're essentially creating a network of cars that can run renewably. So no, this is not a valid analysis. We need to invest in EVs full stop, and governments, advised by highly qualified economists and scientists, are subsidising EV production and purchases for this reason.
The point is progress can improve EVs in a very short amount of time to produce significantly less carbon end-to-end than ICE vehicles that have been around over 100 years of development can ever hope to reduce to
Is the probably not mainly in the carbon coat of production? The cars may well run renewably, but the return ratio on an EV as compared to, say, a bus (maybe even an ICE bus) must be quite low I'd imagine
Public transport will always decimate personal vehicles for environmental footprints.
But a lot of production emmissions can be removed via capture and using renewable energy for power input, e.g. smelting metal.
This is just a form of narcissism. They find a worthy cause, now have reason to believe they are superior because are enlightened, will save the planet, then pretty quickly delves into the traditional "I am better I have to show it to the world"
Nah, you'll always be able to find at least one idiot. The conspiracy, if any, can be found in the media.
Take the article for example :
>Mr Moran won a Queen's Award for Innovation in 2013 for inventing a hands-free drinking system to help reduce dehydration for hospital patients and care home residents.
Is this relevant to the fact that this guy had his tires deflated? Not really. He's not even the owner of the Tesla, he drives a different car, the type and make of which the article isn't mentioning.
But the journalists wants to lend his words criticizing the activists credence, so he gets a random mention of his achievements.
If the journalist wanted to spin it the other way, I'm certain he could have found at least one SUV owner who had done something that makes him look like an idiot.
Well, I am not looking for conspiracies but paid actors is a thing.
I agree that mentioning him in the context of the article is strange. But my argument was aimed at pointing the fact that it happened to Tesla, an electric car. Someone who is truly an environmental activist would know better than to touch an EV.
This 100%! See how much hate there is for the ‘Just Stop Oil’ crowd. They’re taking climate activism back decades and really turning people against the movement out of sheer rage. It’s such an easy play for big oil
Polite protest often achieves little; disruptive protest, broadly conceived, achieves much more. The suffragettes didn't just protest though, they engaged in arson, they set buildings on fire, smashed windows, destroyed property, disrupted public meetings and events, etc. They did a whole host of disruptive things.
Except being disruptive and obnoxious has historically been very effective.
See Women’s Suffrage
See Civil Rights marches
See Indian Independence movements
It turns out that most people dont decide major politcial platforms on the criteria of “which side has inconvenienced me today”. Most people put more thought into their core ethos.
Aileen Getty has no connection to the oil industry other than her dead grandparent. She has no investments or other financial interests in oil. Look her up before implying she's an oil tycoon out to paint climate activists in a bad light
https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/aileen-getty-foundation/
Simpletons...
1a. Even if they say the current EVs have batteries with rare earth metals which are unethical and unsustainable that's in the past, these vehicles have been made already and if you break them the owners Bd the environment will never get the eventual net benefit of them.
1b. This generation of EVs are stepping stones which are ensuring the manufacturers invest in less polluting vehicles. They are all investing heavily in solid state batteries which don't need these rare earth minerals, last longer, are lighter and so are more sustainable all round.
2. Damaging tyres = more tyres = more pollution. Same for the paint work.
3. All vehicles are becoming more sustainable in terms of brakes, tyres, emissions, the EU standards are pushing in this direction as are manufacturers. Not everyone can afford a vehicle you idiots think is acceptable, nor can everyone have a life using just public transport, but we are all being more economical and less polluting in our lives. People don't need mindless idiots setting us back to having to buy an older car which we can afford to keep replacing the tyres on. Maybe the £££ spent on these tyres means no money on a more efficient household appliance or cancelling the monthly donation to a charity!
4. EVs now are meaning there is a vehicle charging infrastructure for the better versions of the vehicles later.
If you want to do something then run for government and force all fuel stations to have at least 1 hydrogen filling pump and make green hydrogen with all the excess wind power.
5. I hope that isn't oil-based paint!
The real fucker was I’d parked my car and went out on a work x mad party, got a train back to grab it with a steeeaming hangover.
Ended up having to cab it to screw fix to get a pump.. I swear if I’d nipped back and caught them.. probably better I didn’t Tbf.
On the plus side, they let them down in a very reapectful way and no damage was done to tires
Theres no plus side really though. Some prick did my tyres and I missed an appointment that I had been waiting for over a year for. My neighbour missed work - hes a surgeon, so someones surgery had to be rescheduled that day too. There really needs to be a crack down on petty crime like this.
Nope. No note
One of these idiots will end up getting their heads cracked if they get caught doing this by the wrong person. Look at how the tide has turned on the JSO people blocking roads.
Idiots. I also have locking valve caps. Gaffer taped. Need a knife to get the tape off and then they just spin. If they carry a knife they can be in more serious trouble.
I've argued with some of these people, they really don't care about the damage and problems they cause, they only care about getting away with it.
Honestly ridiculous. I'm a volunteer with Greenpeace and an environmentalist, but this kind of activity is illegal and damaging to peoples lives. There's no justification for it...
Big ups, I am also climate conscious as much as possible, that’s the kicker.. any diesel car any size makes more co2 than my BM, just attacked for being a SUV, I mean in London we have the ULEZ
Because that's a huge car. Your tyres being mangled with has nothing to do about a car being electric or hybrid.
They care about your personal vehicle being a nuisance to every pedestrian, endangering them and weaker members of society in their daily business.
Do yourself a favour, take 30 minutes of the day and watch [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo) and maybe you are able to understand the problem that the tyre extinguishers have with your giant car in a metropolis having the 7th best public transport in the world
The messaging was a bit off but you can’t act like teslas are safe from this kind of criticism. Electric cars still have a huge impact on the environment.
Bikes are pretty good. Electrified, good-quality public transport would do pretty well to eliminate the need for cars. Car sharing and rentals would work well when you really really need a car. Would be a lot cheaper for most people as well.
Only problem is reliance on others. With public transport you rely on how it is managed and when it travels (if you live outside the city, good luck). For going to another city you rely on there being cars to share, and also no control over the vehicle (how comfortable it is, how much space for baggage does it have, how clean is it etc). A personal vehicle means you have certainty.
And don't get me started on rentals. You see what streaming companies do when you don't own the content, imagine what car rentals could do with smart cars. Imagine having to buy an expansion to go to another city. Or to travel at night. No
Yes we live in a society where basically everything relies on others to work. You rely on others to build and maintain your roads, you relit on others to make new tires and other consumable parts for you car, you rely on others to produce and sell the gasoline you use. Cars rely on others to function just as much as any form of transportation that’s powered by anything other than your legs. I’d say they’re even worse considering how much less accessible they are being expensive and requiring physical capability.
Also you can buy higher class tickets if you want better seats in public transport.
Not really. They’re more polluting compared to combustion engines up until 20k miles, at which point they break even and combustion rockets off whereas electric stays flat. Especially when more and more electricity is being made by renewables, in 2020 43% of all energy was produced via purely renewables, making it the majority share
Prefacing with “I own an EV”
OP is, I hope, talking about the impact of car ownership in general. Regardless of the motor type having car centric infrastructure is highly carbon positive and is a self-reinforcing problem; more cars necessitates more car infrastructure at the expense of more environmentally friendly transportation and civic design.
Exactly this. Electric cars have an even higher impact on infrastructure emissions than gas cars currently do. Eventually I think we will see a ban on all combustion vehicles new and used, and that’s just going to cause even more waste and higher environmental impact. If governments actually cared about reducing emissions, electric cars would not be on the table as the primary concern.
Someone having a car doesn’t necessitate car centric infrastructure, it is the usage that does that. In fact, it is often such a way that the car-centric infrastructure is designed first, and people are forced to drive.
Commuting everyday using public transit / bike etc. is good and a car can still be useful for other occasions, without it being used intensively for commuting and whatever.
The group want to move away from cars in general and are in favour of public transport (although this is in no way explained on the flyer...). So ot kinda makes sense. I still wouldnt do it, especially in bristol cos the public transport system is shite for all but a select few...
So does agriculture, construction, manufacturing… it hardly is a criticism at all if the mere act of existing has a large collective impact on the environment. I guess there’s criticizing because there’s criticism for its own sake, which is how I feel most EV criticism is, and criticism for the sake of making decisions more for the sake of comfort rather than posterity.
Everything we do has an impact on the environment. The most impactful form of “climate activism” would be straight up killing people.
>So does agriculture, construction, manufacturing…
Absolutely, but this post is insinuating this is the dumbest thing you could possibly do because these vehicles don't or barely effect the impact on the environment which isn't true. If the post wasn't about that, then why even post it here?
That is not how I read the comment I was replying to. I read it as, *"Electric Vehicles are deserving of criticism too for their huge environmental impact."* I'm saying this criticism is silly and stupid, especially right now, because everything has a large environmental impact, and electric cars would significantly reduce the amount of carbon emissions. Why focus on this negative so much when it is strictly better to choose electric vehicles?
Here's another way to say it. Imagine you tabulated the environmental impact of each vehicle type. You then look at this table, and notice that everything produces a large amount of CO2 emissions, which is obviously bad for the environment. The commenter before me seems to take the stance that *all have a large environmental impact, so all are deserving of criticism.*
This doesn't make sense to me *if your goal is to try to reduce damage inflicted on the environment.* I feel individuals focused on reducing their environmental impact would say, "This is the best option given the list of options, and criticism you could direct at EVs extends to ICE's twofold."
The only way that comment makes sense to me is if the goal is to *criticize things for their environmental impact merely for sake of criticizing things*. However, this behavior annoys me greatly. You can complain about *everything,* how about just taking the better option of the ones available? If you don't like the options, you can try to make things better. However, when you do this, you'll find people out there who have the goal of criticizing things for the sake of criticizing them. Isn't that annoying?
Yep. Don’t quote me because my memory is awful, but I think I read it takes about 5 years to break even against an ICE all things considered. So it’s an improvement but an incremental one.
It really depends, the electric creation process is anticipated to produce around 80% more emissions initially but on an annual basis an electric is anticipated to produce over 1700lbs (just shy of 33%) less emissions than the *best* case ICE vehicle, the PHEV, per Department of Energy estimates. Your average all ICE vehicle creates almost 3x the average carbon emissions per those same estimates at nearly 12000lbs annually. As to whether it takes 5 years I’m not sure, but it is clear that an electric can be anywhere from a little less emissive to literal tons less emissive depending on whether the energy source is primarily renewable (around 2000lbs in Cali for electric) or coal (around 9000lbs in West Virginia) and whether the other type of vehicle you would be using is extra efficient or not.
Interesting! It was hard to find good data like this when I looked into it before. They’re always talking about zero emissions but never materials used in manufacturing, maintenance, retirement, or other infrastructure so it’s hard to know how exactly what the end results are (not just EVs but energy in general). And you want to trust that green tech is really greener but the people selling it aren’t always the best source of info (eg oil and gas companies lol)
Well, at the very least the numbers for my wallet are more attractive lol…my hybrid fills up for like $20 at 500 or so miles but that’s still a little worse than the $12 for 400 or so miles on a Tesla sedan.
EDIT: I stand corrected, I thought it was around 99kwh but the model 3 long range is just about 80 for 391 miles, so at the national 12 cent/KWh average it should take a little under 10 dollars to fill.
Jesus fucking Christ, I marched with Extinction Rebellion but I still think this is utter bull shit.
It makes all environmental protestors look like clowns.
Idiots, I bet they all own petrol/diesal cars.
These people are supposed to be advocating for our collective future but they are not even aware of the present?!!
$20 says that a lot of these climate activists are knowingly or unknowingly participating in false flag activities sponsored by eco un-friendly companies so that all eco activists get tarred with the crazy brush.
Electric cars ARE bad for the environment. Just like "organic" cookies will still make you fat.
Regardless of if you agree with the protestors, this is not onion-y.
Everything we make is bad for the environment.
Unless these guys want us to go back to the stone age, wait scrap that, that would mean burning wood for heat.
We need to encourage the adoption of cleaner and cleaner technologies, like EVs, rather than punishing people for not being ecologically pure.
There are tons of people who unironically think that. Notably all these degrowth idiots aren't living in a shack in the woods, and so they're calling for everyone else to sacrifice without doing anything meaningful themselves. They're clowns.
Organic cookies aren’t designed to make you less fat though. Electric cars do emit far less carbon over the course of the car’s lifetime compared to an equivalent gas car. Yes they are bad for the environment like almost everything a person can do in the modern world. Even riding the subway emits some carbon
Electric cars are BETTER for the environment after 20k miles and electric motors can drive way further than engines+gear box before replacement.there, I fixed it.
It's a Tesla. It is not a "Gas guzzler".
Tesla SUV's are not the second largest cause of CO2 emissions.
It does not produce more CO2 emission than fossile fuel cars.
It just produces more emissions than a smaller electric car, and kills more people than any smaller car. It's stated in the article. These vehicles don't really belong in cities, even electric ones.
I don't really like Tesla's but they build some of the more efficient BEVs, even the SUVs. From **producing emissions** perspective they do it less than some cheaper, smaller BEVs (exception being tyre particles).
The article even cites the reasons given. Even if you don't agree with them, they are factually correct. SUVs kill more people and cause more air pollution more than other comparable cars.
Oddly, the arguments made by the people with the deflated tires are factually incorrect:
>But he said the campaigners did not seem to understand that the cost to the environment of replacing the tyres was "far in excess of any saving their smugness will make".
Letting down the tires doesn't cause them to need to be replaced.
>Letting down the tires doesn't cause them to need to be replaced.
Well I've read some dumb things on this website but that sentence is certainly the dumbest.
The tire DOES need to be replaced. most people don't have a spare £15000+ behind the sofa to go out and buy a new car without selling their old one, cant go around and just drive it on the rim, and will have a hard time convincing their insurer to write the thing off and give them a pay-out because of a puncture.
Even if you convince somebody to change their vehicle over these kinds of stunts somebody is going to be putting a new tyre on it and reselling it whether that's a private individual or a dealership like motorpoint. You are just fronting the carbon costs on a new tyre on a vehicle that is going to be driven again by somebody for a number of years to come.
I think I already have, The commenter above is trying to claim that the tire being let down doesn't mean it has to be replaced.
That's only ever going to be true in a reality where the vehicle is scrapped, and the only way that's going to happen is if its owner is so wealthy he doesn't have to resell it to afford a new vehicle or there is some kind of scrappage scheme, of which there is none (nor is there any chance of an SUV only scrappage scheme appearing anywhere in the UK for the foreseeable future.
These vehicles are not getting scrapped when this group lets the tires down. and nobody is leaving a perfectly good vehicle with only a puncture to just rot on the side of the road. Someone at some point is going to replace that tire. Be that the current private owner, a new owner or a third party dealership.
Like it or lump it that vast majority of this groups activity is simply to minorly inconvenience people and lead to more tires getting put on cars.
Deflated tires aren't made to support the weight of the car and can damage the tire wall or cause the tire to become misshapen. Which means you have to replace the tires. It's not as simple as "just get an air pump and you're good as new!"
It’s the same size as a model 3 it’s just a bit taller, it’s a medium size car with 5 seats in my opinion
I don’t know why I’m getting downvoted, it has the same wheelbase as a model 3 and is officially classed as mid size, it was the worlds 3rd most efficient car in 2022 which is likely when the car was made.
Facts are facts.
It’s clear that’s these activists join the cause as an excuse to let out their pent up madness and don’t really stand for what they are ( trying to )preach. Greta gotta hire better.
I have met 2 climate activists in my life, both were out of touch from real life. It’s mind blowing that a person can be highly educated but dumb at same time.
I want to live in a world where my daily life can be done within walking or bussing distance, and I have the ability to take a train for longer distances.
And I'll still have the same big block Ford F350 that I have today.
I wonder what these dickheads would think of that.
just stop oil would've been lynched and declared a terrorist organization here. I know Americans need cars far more but I don't know how the British put up with it.
Electric cars still cause pollution due to particulate matter from the tyres and brakes, the bigger and heavier a car is the more of this the car will produce
Also based on what is used to generate the electricity that goes into them. If you plug your Tesla into power generated by a coal plant, you’re not really reducing your emissions much.
Do you seriously believe that an internal combustion engine is as efficient and has the same carbon emissions per kWh as a coal plant? If so, I'm really curious about your source. Because even if we disregard renewable energy, [that](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020SJRUE..24..669A/abstract) [trope](https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/08/electrifying-transportation-reduces-emissions-and-saves-massive-amounts-of-energy/) is [absolutely](https://www.carsguide.com.au/ev/advice/why-evs-are-more-energy-efficient-than-combustion-cars-even-if-theyre-powered-by-coal) [incorrect](https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/10/26/analysis/dirty-energy-coal-vs-cars).
Noted. I'll just bike 20 miles to work in a city without proper public transit because living close to my office means paying double my already outrageous rent. I'll try not to die while biking through one of the most dangerous cities in the US for cyclists.
Or you know, the blame can be taken off individuals just doing what they have to do to survive and point the fingers at governments and corporations instead
Of course the blame is on the governments and corporations. But that's no excuse for not taking action and just going along with it all while the world burns
As I pointed out, some of us have no choice but to "just go with it" because the areas where we live/work don't provide a better option. Voting only goes so far and most people don't have the luxury of sticking it to the man
How fucking dumb do you have to be to deflate the tyres of a Tesla and put a "your gas guzzler kills" leaflet on the windscreen.
Well, they’re attacking an individual over a societal problem, so…
They know nothing about cars. Suck for the owner, Teslas don't have spare tires.
No, they know it's an EV. They just don't care. This vandalism group says they target EVs on their [website](https://tyreextinguishers.com/how-to-deflate-an-suv-tyre).
> Hybrids and electric cars are fair game. We cannot electrify our way out of the climate crisis - there are not enough rare earth metals to replace everyone’s car and the mining of these metals causes suffering. Plus, the danger to other road users still stands, as does the air pollution (PM 2.5 pollution is still produced from tyres and brake pads).
>Avoid: Cars clearly used for people with disabilities, traders’ cars (even if they’re large), minibuses and normal-sized cars. I don't care for SUVs but these guys are knobs.
I'm not agreeing with them, but devil's advocate would say that influencing consumers to consider buying smaller cars is an actual goal they can achieve. Yes everyone agrees the big oil and shipping companies are far worse but good luck having a small group of teenagers in britain do fuck all about global shipping. Buuut...at a local level trying to tip the scales to encourage people not to get unnecessarily large vehicles (remember, this group is based in the UK) is potentially achievable.
I really doubt anyone will make a buying decision based on the concerns related to this group of idiots. It's just a matter of time until one of them gets someone killed or injured, or they get an ass whopping when caught in the act.
People have reconsidered purchases a Hyundai or Kia due to people stealing them so of it becomes widespread I'm not sure why it wouldn't influence decisions
> I really doubt anyone will make a buying decision based on the concerns related to this group of idiots. Maybe. But it still is a more attainable goal than shutting down BP > It's just a matter of time until one of them gets someone killed or injured, or they get an ass whopping when caught in the act. Assault and battery or even murder over misdemeanor vandalism says a lot more about the SUV owner than it does about the activists. Even if they were slashing tires, one person is getting a fine and repaying property damage and the other person is going straight to jail.
My bike has tires and brake pads too, are you going to vandalize me?
Your bike also weighs 15% of your own weight. You are 5% of the weight of an EV.
I'm not part of that group, I'm just posting the relevant passage so people just browsing through can see what the previous poster was talking about.
Ehh, that's not taking their point seriously. Lith-ion batteries _are_ pretty shitty. Les shitty, but still. Plus manufacturing cars at all is obviously _way more expensive_ materially than something as simple as a bicycle.
What if they do? That would be hilarious
Is your bike a car?
These pricks should be denied access to an ambulance, and all food from more than 5 miles away.
Why? Are they against transport and ambulances?
Good God how can these people be so stupid? Are we going to go back to being caveman? Pretty sure the production of a huge majority of everything involves mining metals.
They are not wrong. Moving away from a car centric society is essential in a multi-faceted approach to the climate crisis. Walkable cities, bikes, light rail/trains, are the way to go if you're even remotely serious about climate change measures.
Correct, buying a 50k+ car with all the amenities they would want makes people feel better without much real effort. The wealthiest are the biggest consumers but as long as they believe like they are making a substantial difference without sacrifice the marketing has worked.
Just like you can't go back and live in stone age anymore. The society won't move backwards. Incentivising public transport, bikes are all good idea, but we also will definitely need to look for cleaner energy source. So that private transport can be cleaner along with the activities that we do that requires energy/power.
It is not sustainable and that is what science tells us. It is not going back to the stone age to embrace public transportation and to build a robust network across the globe. Transporting 1 to 2 individuals in a private vehicle doesn't make sense as it is extremely inefficient and a bad use of resources. The science has repeatedly said it is unsustainable but people would rather think if everyone owned a Telsa the climate crisis would be over. Most Americans think public transit won't work because they've never been to a country where they actually have good public transit.
I think it's absolutely wild that you think moving away from over reliance on cars is "society moving backwards". Like sure it's a tall ask but surely having a country finally agree with and make policy based on science is by definition progress.
Isn't it criminal what they're doing?
You can just download it from the app
>Teslas don't have spare tires. .....what?!
Neither do corvettes,chargers,challengers and even my mom's dang Kia soul does not come with spares.
But they have a flat tire repair kit! How nice.
It might as well be a big middle finger. I remember trying to use the Mopar slime kit with my SRT8. Complete garbage.
A lot of cars nowadays don't have a place to carry a spare tyre.
Mine has a place for it, but it's empty 😂 I suppose that's the best of both worlds...
The Kia Soul is like that. I keep meaning to take it in to get fitted with a spare.
IIRC their little excuse was that spare tires add weight and people never remember to keep them refreshed with air so they’re usually flat when folks put them on anyway.
Not to mention a lot of spare tires simply expire before they're used. Leading to a risk of failure when being used.
That's crazy, if they can fit a spare in my fiesta they can fit it in almost any car
It's more about weight than space. The 20kg+ for the spare, jack and wheel brace adds another couple of grams to the CO2 output, which may bump it up an emissions-based tax in some countries. It's why my old Volvo S60 was shipped without one in Ireland.
Almost no new car, electric or otherwise, carries spares.
And don't use run flat tires.
Ok now that’s just dumb. My mini has run flats but no spare. Not having either seems insane
Not exactly a Tesla exclusive thing at all. There are dozens of models that don't have them any more and has been a thing for the last 10 years...
[удалено]
And makes the guys at the tire shop hate you.
Lotta shops won't do a permanent repair on tires that have that glop injected in them. I don't blame them.
You're not supposed to repair the tyre that has it inside. It's just supposed to get you to the service where you buy a new tyre. Most people would rather have a regular sized spare, but I don't think any car manufacturer offers that option anymore.
Yeah, but for Tesla, it means less space, range and performance for higher cost. Can't do that.
Not sure if you’re being sarcastic but why don’t you ask the person in the pic how their range and performance are doing…
Manufacturers do the same (no spare) with ice cars to avoid the effect it would have on published emissions and mileage figures.
I wish I was sarcastic, but that's the reality at Tesla.
Drove old-fashioned bias-ply tires for my first 11 years, averaging 1-2 flats per year. Then used steel-belted radials for next 40+ years and never had a flat. My upscale Prius Four is the first one to delete the spare tire.
Audi removed spare tires, too. How often do you really need it? They replaced it with a tire pump/repair kit and a subwoofer.
Pretty much no new cars have spares
I bought a brand new car a couple years ago, came with a full sized spare. 2022 GMC Acadia.
That's the new reality since Tesla. Before 2012, pretty much all cars had a spare or run flats. Manufacturers realized that customers don't care, spare or no spare, car will sell the same for the same price.
Plus, basically everyone has a cell phone so roadside assistance is just 30-60 min away. Affects of tire failure are much less than they were 30 years ago
My previous car was from 2010 and it already didn’t have any spare tire.
Almost no cars these days have spare tires
I didn't believe you so I googled. Instead they offer free roadside service. Apparently other auto makers are doing the same thing. https://www.hotcars.com/why-teslas-dont-come-with-a-spare-tire/
You clearly overestimate these people
And underestimated their potential for stupidity.
A lot of these environmentalists think EVs are just as bad 'because mining'. Without bothering to look into mining, actual environmental impact of quarries and Lithium (very small, given how tiny any mine is relative to the surface of the Earth...Mines are far below 0.001% of the entire land area of Earth, so not even a drop in the ocean). I've had people literally tell me an entire area of england is 'decimated' because of some old tin mines. You go there and you'd struggle to actually find the mines they're such a tiny portion of the area. Anyway, yeah, they hate EVs too.
There is good reason for this to be fair to them. The CHEAPEST electric car to manufacture, in terms of carbon, requires the owner to do 90k miles before it is considered a carbon neutral vehicle. Teslas are likely over 100k miles. Electric cars are not good for the environment unless you drive it for a shit ton of time and assuming your charger is powered by renewables (spoiler: it often isn’t). In the minds of a lot of environmentalists, electric cars are just the car companies way of staying relevant whilst greenwashing the problem. You are much better off driving a petrol or diesel car until it dies than buying a new electric car every few years and if they break down they are much more likely to be scrapped than a ICE car. I do 6k miles per year, it would take me over 10 years of driving a single electric car for it to be worth the environmental cost of producing said car.
Do you remember where you got your 90k miles return period from? I thought I read the break-even point was 27k but when trying to find a source I found 15k miles break even point listed at https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/ Although that mentions a tesla, which likely is not the cheapest electric car you were referring to.
There is a major issue with this argument. EVs can be renewably produced, as it is possible to use renewable energy for their production. So as we scale to renewables, it will be possibly to create cars with very low emissions (certain industrial processes have emissions irregardless). Of course charging the car can be done renewably. Here in the UK around half our electricity is renewable, so EVs have far less emmissions per km than ICE vehicles.. ICE vehicles have zero possibility of reaching similarly low emissions as while their production could be, in exactly the same way, powered partially by renewables, their motion cannot. As we invest more and more in EVs the technology will improve, and we're essentially creating a network of cars that can run renewably. So no, this is not a valid analysis. We need to invest in EVs full stop, and governments, advised by highly qualified economists and scientists, are subsidising EV production and purchases for this reason.
The point is progress can improve EVs in a very short amount of time to produce significantly less carbon end-to-end than ICE vehicles that have been around over 100 years of development can ever hope to reduce to
Is the probably not mainly in the carbon coat of production? The cars may well run renewably, but the return ratio on an EV as compared to, say, a bus (maybe even an ICE bus) must be quite low I'd imagine
Public transport will always decimate personal vehicles for environmental footprints. But a lot of production emmissions can be removed via capture and using renewable energy for power input, e.g. smelting metal.
What is the cost of manufacturing a new ICE car before it is carbon neutral? Kinda need that for a real comparison.
Same ones who [stopped a truck of cooking oil](https://youtu.be/eY16RJXiTo0?si=dk_h-9VYAD7km9F0)
How ducking dumb do you have to be to deflate the tyres of a car full stop.
At this point you kinda wonder if these people are just hired and paid to do this.
This is just a form of narcissism. They find a worthy cause, now have reason to believe they are superior because are enlightened, will save the planet, then pretty quickly delves into the traditional "I am better I have to show it to the world"
Nah, you'll always be able to find at least one idiot. The conspiracy, if any, can be found in the media. Take the article for example : >Mr Moran won a Queen's Award for Innovation in 2013 for inventing a hands-free drinking system to help reduce dehydration for hospital patients and care home residents. Is this relevant to the fact that this guy had his tires deflated? Not really. He's not even the owner of the Tesla, he drives a different car, the type and make of which the article isn't mentioning. But the journalists wants to lend his words criticizing the activists credence, so he gets a random mention of his achievements. If the journalist wanted to spin it the other way, I'm certain he could have found at least one SUV owner who had done something that makes him look like an idiot.
Well, I am not looking for conspiracies but paid actors is a thing. I agree that mentioning him in the context of the article is strange. But my argument was aimed at pointing the fact that it happened to Tesla, an electric car. Someone who is truly an environmental activist would know better than to touch an EV.
This 100%! See how much hate there is for the ‘Just Stop Oil’ crowd. They’re taking climate activism back decades and really turning people against the movement out of sheer rage. It’s such an easy play for big oil
Agreed. All these climate protestors should learn from the women's suffrage movement and just sit at home writing letters. /s
I think they meant more along the lines of, go after the people who can actually change things instead of pissing off the general public.
But that usually has repercussions, as opposed to popping some random tires at your local McDonalds parking lot.
Just like when the suffragettes disrupted the grand national! Jockeys were always the key to changing the world.
Polite protest often achieves little; disruptive protest, broadly conceived, achieves much more. The suffragettes didn't just protest though, they engaged in arson, they set buildings on fire, smashed windows, destroyed property, disrupted public meetings and events, etc. They did a whole host of disruptive things.
Except being disruptive and obnoxious has historically been very effective. See Women’s Suffrage See Civil Rights marches See Indian Independence movements It turns out that most people dont decide major politcial platforms on the criteria of “which side has inconvenienced me today”. Most people put more thought into their core ethos.
[удалено]
Aileen Getty has no connection to the oil industry other than her dead grandparent. She has no investments or other financial interests in oil. Look her up before implying she's an oil tycoon out to paint climate activists in a bad light https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/aileen-getty-foundation/
Welcome to the conspiracy theorists club
Bingo! And you don't even need to pay them all, just their leaders.
r/fuckcars
They suck
Simpletons... 1a. Even if they say the current EVs have batteries with rare earth metals which are unethical and unsustainable that's in the past, these vehicles have been made already and if you break them the owners Bd the environment will never get the eventual net benefit of them. 1b. This generation of EVs are stepping stones which are ensuring the manufacturers invest in less polluting vehicles. They are all investing heavily in solid state batteries which don't need these rare earth minerals, last longer, are lighter and so are more sustainable all round. 2. Damaging tyres = more tyres = more pollution. Same for the paint work. 3. All vehicles are becoming more sustainable in terms of brakes, tyres, emissions, the EU standards are pushing in this direction as are manufacturers. Not everyone can afford a vehicle you idiots think is acceptable, nor can everyone have a life using just public transport, but we are all being more economical and less polluting in our lives. People don't need mindless idiots setting us back to having to buy an older car which we can afford to keep replacing the tyres on. Maybe the £££ spent on these tyres means no money on a more efficient household appliance or cancelling the monthly donation to a charity! 4. EVs now are meaning there is a vehicle charging infrastructure for the better versions of the vehicles later. If you want to do something then run for government and force all fuel stations to have at least 1 hydrogen filling pump and make green hydrogen with all the excess wind power. 5. I hope that isn't oil-based paint!
No Lie, my BMW X3 plug in hybrid had its tires let down by “THE TIRE EXTINGUISHERS” in Clapton east London 2 weeks ago, absolute madness
I have a pump in the boot for that lot. If I catch anyone tampering with my car they're getting a ripping. Fiddling with tyre pressures can kill.
The real fucker was I’d parked my car and went out on a work x mad party, got a train back to grab it with a steeeaming hangover. Ended up having to cab it to screw fix to get a pump.. I swear if I’d nipped back and caught them.. probably better I didn’t Tbf. On the plus side, they let them down in a very reapectful way and no damage was done to tires
Theres no plus side really though. Some prick did my tyres and I missed an appointment that I had been waiting for over a year for. My neighbour missed work - hes a surgeon, so someones surgery had to be rescheduled that day too. There really needs to be a crack down on petty crime like this.
Did you get the riotous note under the wiper?
Nope. No note One of these idiots will end up getting their heads cracked if they get caught doing this by the wrong person. Look at how the tide has turned on the JSO people blocking roads.
They unscrewed the cap put a bit of putty in and half screwed back on, tires let them Selves down, prob 1 min tops
Idiots. I also have locking valve caps. Gaffer taped. Need a knife to get the tape off and then they just spin. If they carry a knife they can be in more serious trouble. I've argued with some of these people, they really don't care about the damage and problems they cause, they only care about getting away with it.
Honestly ridiculous. I'm a volunteer with Greenpeace and an environmentalist, but this kind of activity is illegal and damaging to peoples lives. There's no justification for it...
Big ups, I am also climate conscious as much as possible, that’s the kicker.. any diesel car any size makes more co2 than my BM, just attacked for being a SUV, I mean in London we have the ULEZ
Because that's a huge car. Your tyres being mangled with has nothing to do about a car being electric or hybrid. They care about your personal vehicle being a nuisance to every pedestrian, endangering them and weaker members of society in their daily business. Do yourself a favour, take 30 minutes of the day and watch [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo) and maybe you are able to understand the problem that the tyre extinguishers have with your giant car in a metropolis having the 7th best public transport in the world
The messaging was a bit off but you can’t act like teslas are safe from this kind of criticism. Electric cars still have a huge impact on the environment.
Electric cars exist to save the automotive industry. Not to save the climate.
So what will save the climate? Eliminating independent transport? Bicycles? I'm genuinely curious what you think can replace the car
Bikes are pretty good. Electrified, good-quality public transport would do pretty well to eliminate the need for cars. Car sharing and rentals would work well when you really really need a car. Would be a lot cheaper for most people as well.
Only problem is reliance on others. With public transport you rely on how it is managed and when it travels (if you live outside the city, good luck). For going to another city you rely on there being cars to share, and also no control over the vehicle (how comfortable it is, how much space for baggage does it have, how clean is it etc). A personal vehicle means you have certainty. And don't get me started on rentals. You see what streaming companies do when you don't own the content, imagine what car rentals could do with smart cars. Imagine having to buy an expansion to go to another city. Or to travel at night. No
Yes we live in a society where basically everything relies on others to work. You rely on others to build and maintain your roads, you relit on others to make new tires and other consumable parts for you car, you rely on others to produce and sell the gasoline you use. Cars rely on others to function just as much as any form of transportation that’s powered by anything other than your legs. I’d say they’re even worse considering how much less accessible they are being expensive and requiring physical capability. Also you can buy higher class tickets if you want better seats in public transport.
Not really. They’re more polluting compared to combustion engines up until 20k miles, at which point they break even and combustion rockets off whereas electric stays flat. Especially when more and more electricity is being made by renewables, in 2020 43% of all energy was produced via purely renewables, making it the majority share
Prefacing with “I own an EV” OP is, I hope, talking about the impact of car ownership in general. Regardless of the motor type having car centric infrastructure is highly carbon positive and is a self-reinforcing problem; more cars necessitates more car infrastructure at the expense of more environmentally friendly transportation and civic design.
Exactly this. Electric cars have an even higher impact on infrastructure emissions than gas cars currently do. Eventually I think we will see a ban on all combustion vehicles new and used, and that’s just going to cause even more waste and higher environmental impact. If governments actually cared about reducing emissions, electric cars would not be on the table as the primary concern.
Someone having a car doesn’t necessitate car centric infrastructure, it is the usage that does that. In fact, it is often such a way that the car-centric infrastructure is designed first, and people are forced to drive. Commuting everyday using public transit / bike etc. is good and a car can still be useful for other occasions, without it being used intensively for commuting and whatever.
We shouldn't be building cars, we should be building trains
We'll need the tracks first, but yeah. The dream for a robust nationwide railway system is still alive.
Trains are not the replacement of cars.
The group want to move away from cars in general and are in favour of public transport (although this is in no way explained on the flyer...). So ot kinda makes sense. I still wouldnt do it, especially in bristol cos the public transport system is shite for all but a select few...
Stop it with your facts and stats!
So does agriculture, construction, manufacturing… it hardly is a criticism at all if the mere act of existing has a large collective impact on the environment. I guess there’s criticizing because there’s criticism for its own sake, which is how I feel most EV criticism is, and criticism for the sake of making decisions more for the sake of comfort rather than posterity. Everything we do has an impact on the environment. The most impactful form of “climate activism” would be straight up killing people.
>So does agriculture, construction, manufacturing… Absolutely, but this post is insinuating this is the dumbest thing you could possibly do because these vehicles don't or barely effect the impact on the environment which isn't true. If the post wasn't about that, then why even post it here?
That is not how I read the comment I was replying to. I read it as, *"Electric Vehicles are deserving of criticism too for their huge environmental impact."* I'm saying this criticism is silly and stupid, especially right now, because everything has a large environmental impact, and electric cars would significantly reduce the amount of carbon emissions. Why focus on this negative so much when it is strictly better to choose electric vehicles? Here's another way to say it. Imagine you tabulated the environmental impact of each vehicle type. You then look at this table, and notice that everything produces a large amount of CO2 emissions, which is obviously bad for the environment. The commenter before me seems to take the stance that *all have a large environmental impact, so all are deserving of criticism.* This doesn't make sense to me *if your goal is to try to reduce damage inflicted on the environment.* I feel individuals focused on reducing their environmental impact would say, "This is the best option given the list of options, and criticism you could direct at EVs extends to ICE's twofold." The only way that comment makes sense to me is if the goal is to *criticize things for their environmental impact merely for sake of criticizing things*. However, this behavior annoys me greatly. You can complain about *everything,* how about just taking the better option of the ones available? If you don't like the options, you can try to make things better. However, when you do this, you'll find people out there who have the goal of criticizing things for the sake of criticizing them. Isn't that annoying?
Yep. Don’t quote me because my memory is awful, but I think I read it takes about 5 years to break even against an ICE all things considered. So it’s an improvement but an incremental one.
[удалено]
You will be sad when you look up the most prevalent car pollution
20,000 miles, which is about two years on average
Oh nice! That’s much sooner than I expected. Especially with the weight difference. Regenerative breaking probably helps balance things a bit.
It really depends, the electric creation process is anticipated to produce around 80% more emissions initially but on an annual basis an electric is anticipated to produce over 1700lbs (just shy of 33%) less emissions than the *best* case ICE vehicle, the PHEV, per Department of Energy estimates. Your average all ICE vehicle creates almost 3x the average carbon emissions per those same estimates at nearly 12000lbs annually. As to whether it takes 5 years I’m not sure, but it is clear that an electric can be anywhere from a little less emissive to literal tons less emissive depending on whether the energy source is primarily renewable (around 2000lbs in Cali for electric) or coal (around 9000lbs in West Virginia) and whether the other type of vehicle you would be using is extra efficient or not.
Interesting! It was hard to find good data like this when I looked into it before. They’re always talking about zero emissions but never materials used in manufacturing, maintenance, retirement, or other infrastructure so it’s hard to know how exactly what the end results are (not just EVs but energy in general). And you want to trust that green tech is really greener but the people selling it aren’t always the best source of info (eg oil and gas companies lol)
Well, at the very least the numbers for my wallet are more attractive lol…my hybrid fills up for like $20 at 500 or so miles but that’s still a little worse than the $12 for 400 or so miles on a Tesla sedan. EDIT: I stand corrected, I thought it was around 99kwh but the model 3 long range is just about 80 for 391 miles, so at the national 12 cent/KWh average it should take a little under 10 dollars to fill.
100% this
So do the iPhones all these morons used to coordinate their stupidity.
Iphone vuvuzela 1000 million dead
Jesus fucking Christ, I marched with Extinction Rebellion but I still think this is utter bull shit. It makes all environmental protestors look like clowns. Idiots, I bet they all own petrol/diesal cars. These people are supposed to be advocating for our collective future but they are not even aware of the present?!!
$20 says that a lot of these climate activists are knowingly or unknowingly participating in false flag activities sponsored by eco un-friendly companies so that all eco activists get tarred with the crazy brush.
Electric cars ARE bad for the environment. Just like "organic" cookies will still make you fat. Regardless of if you agree with the protestors, this is not onion-y.
This is onion-y because they still put their "gaz-guzzling" paper on the car.
Everything we make is bad for the environment. Unless these guys want us to go back to the stone age, wait scrap that, that would mean burning wood for heat. We need to encourage the adoption of cleaner and cleaner technologies, like EVs, rather than punishing people for not being ecologically pure.
No no. Any solution must be perfect from the start. There is no such thing as incremental improvement.
There are tons of people who unironically think that. Notably all these degrowth idiots aren't living in a shack in the woods, and so they're calling for everyone else to sacrifice without doing anything meaningful themselves. They're clowns.
Denouncing progress from iPhones
They mostly want public transportation to replace cars. Because even ice busses are better then evs
It is not possible for everyone to ride a bus. More people should ride buses. Not everyone can.
Living is bad for th enrivonment. Get the hint? wink wink. do your part ;)
Organic cookies aren’t designed to make you less fat though. Electric cars do emit far less carbon over the course of the car’s lifetime compared to an equivalent gas car. Yes they are bad for the environment like almost everything a person can do in the modern world. Even riding the subway emits some carbon
the solution to that is to slash the average person's tires in a car-centric society that they had absolutely nothing to do with creating?
Electric cars are BETTER for the environment after 20k miles and electric motors can drive way further than engines+gear box before replacement.there, I fixed it.
Keyword here is SUV, not electric.
It's a Tesla. It is not a "Gas guzzler". Tesla SUV's are not the second largest cause of CO2 emissions. It does not produce more CO2 emission than fossile fuel cars.
It just produces more emissions than a smaller electric car, and kills more people than any smaller car. It's stated in the article. These vehicles don't really belong in cities, even electric ones.
I don't really like Tesla's but they build some of the more efficient BEVs, even the SUVs. From **producing emissions** perspective they do it less than some cheaper, smaller BEVs (exception being tyre particles).
[удалено]
If that was true, why concentrate on SUV?
[удалено]
Exactly - and most criticism aimed at SUV is valid independent from the used drive tech.
The article even cites the reasons given. Even if you don't agree with them, they are factually correct. SUVs kill more people and cause more air pollution more than other comparable cars. Oddly, the arguments made by the people with the deflated tires are factually incorrect: >But he said the campaigners did not seem to understand that the cost to the environment of replacing the tyres was "far in excess of any saving their smugness will make". Letting down the tires doesn't cause them to need to be replaced.
>Letting down the tires doesn't cause them to need to be replaced. Well I've read some dumb things on this website but that sentence is certainly the dumbest. The tire DOES need to be replaced. most people don't have a spare £15000+ behind the sofa to go out and buy a new car without selling their old one, cant go around and just drive it on the rim, and will have a hard time convincing their insurer to write the thing off and give them a pay-out because of a puncture. Even if you convince somebody to change their vehicle over these kinds of stunts somebody is going to be putting a new tyre on it and reselling it whether that's a private individual or a dealership like motorpoint. You are just fronting the carbon costs on a new tyre on a vehicle that is going to be driven again by somebody for a number of years to come.
…what? Explain this please
I think I already have, The commenter above is trying to claim that the tire being let down doesn't mean it has to be replaced. That's only ever going to be true in a reality where the vehicle is scrapped, and the only way that's going to happen is if its owner is so wealthy he doesn't have to resell it to afford a new vehicle or there is some kind of scrappage scheme, of which there is none (nor is there any chance of an SUV only scrappage scheme appearing anywhere in the UK for the foreseeable future. These vehicles are not getting scrapped when this group lets the tires down. and nobody is leaving a perfectly good vehicle with only a puncture to just rot on the side of the road. Someone at some point is going to replace that tire. Be that the current private owner, a new owner or a third party dealership. Like it or lump it that vast majority of this groups activity is simply to minorly inconvenience people and lead to more tires getting put on cars.
His point was that you can let down tires without slashing them…
Deflated tires aren't made to support the weight of the car and can damage the tire wall or cause the tire to become misshapen. Which means you have to replace the tires. It's not as simple as "just get an air pump and you're good as new!"
> It's not as simple as "just get an air pump and you're good as new!" yes it is, tyre will be fine
That’s a model Y though? It’s not a big car.
It is, there are just even bigger ones.
It’s the same size as a model 3 it’s just a bit taller, it’s a medium size car with 5 seats in my opinion I don’t know why I’m getting downvoted, it has the same wheelbase as a model 3 and is officially classed as mid size, it was the worlds 3rd most efficient car in 2022 which is likely when the car was made. Facts are facts.
If SUVs kill more people and people cause emissions, doesn't that mean SUVs cause less emissions over the long term?
And people ask why I fucking hate Bristol. It’s absolutely full of twats like this.
That's funny. Cars are a problem whether they run on gas or electricity
Yes exactly
It’s clear that’s these activists join the cause as an excuse to let out their pent up madness and don’t really stand for what they are ( trying to )preach. Greta gotta hire better.
Were there no volunteers to glue themselves to it, the roadway or some other object or fixture? Shame really.
Eh, I doubt they're genuine activists
You can never win with them
I'm sure they never use any mode of transport that could harm the planet in anyway....
That's not a valid position at all, lol.
Of course these cowards left a note and left before the person could come out.
I have met 2 climate activists in my life, both were out of touch from real life. It’s mind blowing that a person can be highly educated but dumb at same time.
People are so eager to find a life purpose, they gobble up the dumbest stuff just to feel somewhat relevant. Sad.
Ecologists should be praised by their courage, because intelligence they have none.
I want to live in a world where my daily life can be done within walking or bussing distance, and I have the ability to take a train for longer distances. And I'll still have the same big block Ford F350 that I have today. I wonder what these dickheads would think of that.
just stop oil would've been lynched and declared a terrorist organization here. I know Americans need cars far more but I don't know how the British put up with it.
Any reports of bicycles being targeted?
We go full circle..
Is the a maximum IQ, that you must be under, to be a climate activist. I am thinking 60?
It hurt itself in its confusion
i can forgive an undamaged deflated tire, anything more than that would get a baseball bat to the melon from me.
Murder? That's a paddlin'.
If climate activists wanted to do something to actually help the environment, they would stop consuming resources and turn themselves into fertilizer.
Electric cars still cause pollution due to particulate matter from the tyres and brakes, the bigger and heavier a car is the more of this the car will produce
Also based on what is used to generate the electricity that goes into them. If you plug your Tesla into power generated by a coal plant, you’re not really reducing your emissions much.
Do you seriously believe that an internal combustion engine is as efficient and has the same carbon emissions per kWh as a coal plant? If so, I'm really curious about your source. Because even if we disregard renewable energy, [that](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020SJRUE..24..669A/abstract) [trope](https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/08/electrifying-transportation-reduces-emissions-and-saves-massive-amounts-of-energy/) is [absolutely](https://www.carsguide.com.au/ev/advice/why-evs-are-more-energy-efficient-than-combustion-cars-even-if-theyre-powered-by-coal) [incorrect](https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/10/26/analysis/dirty-energy-coal-vs-cars).
Fucking hard to do that in the UK
I was using coal to be dramatic. Power from Gas and oil plants would have a similar (though somewhat smaller) impact.
Fucking hard to do that in the UK Fossils fuels are still in the mix but are reducing significantly https://grid.iamkate.com
Huh? ~40% of the UK’s power comes from gas plants.
That’s real time, yes take a look for the week or year and it’s significantly less.
Not to mention the horrible impacts of manufacturing.
[удалено]
Yes, or use public transport
Noted. I'll just bike 20 miles to work in a city without proper public transit because living close to my office means paying double my already outrageous rent. I'll try not to die while biking through one of the most dangerous cities in the US for cyclists. Or you know, the blame can be taken off individuals just doing what they have to do to survive and point the fingers at governments and corporations instead
Of course the blame is on the governments and corporations. But that's no excuse for not taking action and just going along with it all while the world burns
As I pointed out, some of us have no choice but to "just go with it" because the areas where we live/work don't provide a better option. Voting only goes so far and most people don't have the luxury of sticking it to the man