Drivers never had any negative feelings if the car next to them on the road was an electric car. Why would they? It has turn indicators like any other automobile, and there’s zero chance that it’s spewing particulates like a diesel often could.
There was no controversy until politicians began saying there was going to be a ban on combustion cars.
The public has come to expect [unwelcome enforcement measures](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing_in_New_York_City) when it comes to driving. Consider the London ULEZ zone: it’s possible for a driver to unexpectedly receive a substantial *post facto* bill. Or perhaps they’d [need a toll transponder from one monopoly supplier](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing_in_New_York_City#Proposed_tolls), with attendant privacy concerns. This represents a serious regression from previous conditions. Then there’s the inevitable feelings that government policy is overtly favoring some users while punishing others, or is deliberately underprovisioning alternatives.
by pdp10
4 comments
It’s time to stop fucking around with climate change. The government should be putting in more effort in combating the misinformation and be better at explaining why this is a huge fuckup, but it is not time to try to ease away from mandates.
There was no controversy until the right wing media ecosystem figured out that EVs were about to eat away at ICE market share
>Consider the London ULEZ zone:
Shocking, I know, but the local government looks after *all* the constituents, and ‘clean air’ for all has a much higher priority then the feelings of the owners/drivers of the exhausts and tires that cause the pollution.
It’s not that there is no alternative to get into the ULEZ zone, and it’s the drivers themselves who decide, by their choice of transport, how much they are willing to pay for the privilege.
Nope.