Comment by lagniappe

PHEVs are a very interim solution. There are some advantages while range anxiety is an issue.

Yes, EVs have a weight penalty of ~250-500kg of battery currently.

Battery technology is rapidly advancing, when Na-ion batteries are introduced more widely, the whole range anxiety issue will become moot, because a recharge will take as long as refueling an ICE vehicle.

The weight difference will also start to reduce, both due to newer batteries, but also moving to lighter weight construction and increased use of alternatives to steel.

Arguing for ICE technology in 2025 is like Blackberry/Nokia users complaining about the loss of keyboards & T9 texting.

Unfortunately most people's actual usage patterns for plug-in hybrids appear to make them worse than just a straight up ICE - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...

I looked into PHEVs on my last vehicle shopping go-round, since few pure EVs met my cargo size requirements (stroller/baby life is a whole thing).

Ultimately, it was way more worth it to go all the way up to an F150 Lightning than to go with a good PHEV, partly due to up-front cost, but mostly due to ongoing cost: I will need to change the oil on the electric motors maybe every 150,000miles, and I never need an emissions test again. PHEVs require keeping the gas engine up, and getting it emissions-tested.

A whole category of cost just straight-up disappeared, for cheaper than I could get a RAV4 Prime too.

Hybrids don't solve the main problem which is global warming, which demands zero carbon, not 50MPG gas cars.

ICE cars also often leak all sorts of liquids onto roadways (and thus into our water ways).

Hi, I’m indeed the same person. I also hate oversized trucks. I’m generally against things that make the world worse for marginal benefits.

The cybertruck clocks in at around the same weight as oversized trucks. Whenever I see people alone in either, I’m pretty annoyed.

Semis for long haul are also annoying and we should substantially increase rail infra in the US

Isn't brake pollution a lot less with EVs?

I'm the person who commented it and I don't appreciate your straw man here.

Please don't downvote comments because you don't agree with the argument. Downvotes should be for comments that add little to the discussion.

I agree that discussing weight with regard to EVs, without acknowledging that (in the US) the fashion is for big heavy ICE cars is just as polluting is disingenuous.

That said, outside the US the trend is for smaller cars, and equally the weight of a small EV is not hugely dissimilar to a common ICE car.

Frankly I'm not sure there's a whole lot to say about tire dust- cars need tires. EVs generate less brake dust. If there's a tire dust discussion to be had, then that discussion is independent of the vehicle fuel source.

That literally makes no sense. There’s a point on the accelerator pedal curve where you are coasting (between it applying power or applying regen), you get used to staying around that position pretty quickly because you stop short of where you are aiming to stop otherwise. You basically only back off past that point and into regen when you would be braking in an ICE car, so there is really no difference.

Braking from regen or braking from a brake pad has the same net impact on tire wear. EVs can coast too and don’t apply full regen the moment you apply brakes. Some even have brake coach alerts to get you to gradually apply the brakes to maximize energy return.

The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. The reason there's more dust is from the increased weight of the EV not because of regen braking. You can coast in EV as well, that is not exclusive to ICE.

Yes current EVs are heavy. It's not at all clear that this will prevail as solid state batteries evolve to become standard. It is highly possible that EVs will soon be lighter than comparable ICE vehicles [1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46505975

> A 40 ft bus 2 axle bus with 80 passengers [...] If instead those 80 passengers each drove alone in a Kia Niro EV

Bzzzt. Wrong, unless you literally have a bus that goes from A to B without stopping. City buses do not carry "x passengers", they serve trips. An 80-passenger bus serves way more trips than 80 (though not on average of course), as people can freely get on and off at any time.

And of course, there are way more aspects of this problem than just road wear, parking space for one.

But sure, we absolutely should put buses on rail tracks!

Thank you for doing the calculations. This is interesting and useful. Yes, people should switch to EVs, but mostly because it helps build resilient independent grids (eventually), EVs add a layer of energy storage, we can dump excess energy when its negatively priced (or free) and supply power back to the grid when its costly, replacing peaker plants.

I wasn't talking about passenger buses, because thats unlikely going to happen in US. Almost all of damage is done by 18-wheelers. A fully loaded 18-wheeler: 80,000 lb. Everytime a discussion comes on ICE vs EV, the fossil fuel proponents immediately jump to but EVs weigh more (debatable) and cause more damage. The damage they cause is insignificant compared to 18-wheelers. I'm not entirely sure if EVs weigh more either, maybe the earlier models did, but energy density keeps increasing. Also, there is no compelling reason to have 300+ mile range batteries when most of the trips are under 3 - 5 miles.

> "Walking and biking environments result in ghettoes"

I must admit this viewpoint is one I have never seen before! Instead I've heard many arguments that bike lanes and pedestrianization are forms of gentrification, but resulting "ghettoes?" +1 for creativity!

That's a ... take.

What a ridiculous take. There are many, many cities and towns worldwide that are primarily walk/bike friendly and they seem to do very well in terms of quality of life.