- Where Tesla is the darling of the tech world, Uber is facing legal challenges around the globe. In the last month, the ride-sharing service has faced a new spat of restrictions, protests, and even violence in cities in the US, France, Mexico, Brazil, and South Africa. The action against Uber stems from taxi drivers who argue their livelihoods are threatened by Uber's cheap rides and easy-to-use hailing app. Though still some years away, self-driving cars could put such drivers out of business permanently, with or without Uber.
Not really much of a story here. It's no surprise that Uber would be interested in self-driving cars, given their business model, but that tech is still many, many years down the line. I'm not sure that Tesla is "the darling of the tech world". They've certainly had quite a bit of criticism over their expansion in China, they're still having major issues with infrastructure in Europe and North America, and some recent studies have raised some questions about just how 'green' EVs are.
>that tech is still many, many years down the line remove two many's and you'll be closer to the mark.
I suppose in many ways that argument would be a semantic one. I haven't followed the reports recently, but my understanding is that 2020 would be a very optimistic estimate. Hyundai seems to be planning for 2030, as does Mercedes.remove two many's and you'll be closer to the mark.
Still, an optimistic estimate of 4.5 years away for such a revolutionary technology is pretty amazing.
The Notter study is a wild'n'crazy adventure of masked externalities. For example, it makes much of how coal produces electricity in the United States. Guess what. It also makes hay over whether or not lithium is recyclable, without pointing out that lithium oxide is completely non-toxic and that destruction of lithium batteries can't really be accomplished in a way that's bad for the environment. It can, by the way. Even Mother Earth News acknowledged that your 20-year-old Chevy pickup was better for the environment than your brand new Prius for the simple fact that the Chevy doesn't need to be built. But again, it's not an apples-apples discussion. To argue that an electric vehicle is somehow worse for the environment than a gas vehicle requires willful ignorance of thermodynamics and chemistry for the simple fact that the efficiencies of the electric grid and an electric vehicle trump the shit out of dinosaur juice just about any way you care to examine the issue.
For some reason, I can't get the article to pull up, but if I had to guess, it's probably analyzing the environmental impact of mining the metals needed for the battery, manufacturing, shipping, and finally disposing of them. If that's the case, I wouldn't be surprised that they're not as amazing as people say they are. I remember reading an article about 10 years ago how Hummers have a smaller overall carbon footprint than Prius's. I've also heard tons of arguments that ethanol fuels are nothing more than bullshit fuels used to prop up the corn industry, which I also find very plausible. That said, Uber and Tesla aren't the only games in town. I'm sure there are other companies, both here in the states as well as internationally, that are toying with the ideas. I wouldn't be surprised if the words "Google Taxi" weren't written on some post-it note on a Google exec's desk right now. People keep on talking more and more about automated cars, factories, shipping, etc. Unlike flying cars, I think these ideas hold a bit more realistic merit, no matter how the cars are powered.some recent studies have raised some questions about just how 'green' EVs are