What say you to those who grow their own food, produce their own power with microhydro, solar, and or wind, (or only buy renewable energy, possible in California) and drive electric vehicles or bicycles when they drive?

What about those who still pollute, but offset their carbon usage by buying credits/planting trees?

Can they blame the problem on the companies who supply destructive products and the junk science that tricks gullible ignoramuses into believing they aren't destructive...or do those companies get to continue to abdicate their responsibility, pawning it off on their customers?

I mean, your position seems to be if you assholes wouldn't buy the lead painted products, we wouldn't be selling it to toy companies and producing studies claiming it's safe....so it's your fault your child is brain damaged....or the same argument over opioids, your fault you listened to your doctor and got addicted, then turned to heroin, not your doctor who told you the pills weren't addictive, certainly not the drug company who told your doctor they were safe, right?
Fortunately, courts don't think that way, just ask Johnson and Johnson.

Yes, customers bear some responsibility for what they buy, but not nearly as much as the sellers, especially true when the sellers advertise by lying about the dangers. When companies lie about their products dangers, they make themselves 100% responsible for their damages.

Sorry, I'm definitely only referring to the coal-rolling shitstains that have nothing better to do than passive-aggressively bully other people.

If you don't like electric vehicles, don't buy one.

Don't see anyone blocking diesel pumps.

Ps. I don't own or want an EV, and my Mustang definitely gets worse mileage than any diesel, by design. If someone looks down their nose at me, I'm not going to do shit to innocent bystanders just because I'm a whiny little bitch like the ICEing dicks.

100% torque at 0rpm makes electric vehicles perfect for towing.

Be sure to deposit any charge station blocking vehicles you move at the proper drop off point on the nearest train tracks.

What a beautiful time to be alive. To watch the electric vehicle come about and mature over the nest 30 years will be awesome.

I would like to think "punch a nazi" isn't especially extreme though, certainly not extremely leftist. You can certainly pickup a large number of right leaning people who are on board for punching nazis.

It's other things from the left that I fear are needlessly driving away right leaning folks.

Calls for halting parts of the economy to save the world from catastrophic climate change, be that banning coal or oil or to a lesser extent carbon taxes. Instead taking the positive approach of promoting non-fossil fuels on the power grid and electric vehicles accomplishes more and doesn't directly attack the industry and livelihood of a large part of middle America.

Anything that amounts to calling it immoral to define a man as a human with a penis and a woman as a human with a vagina. How many voters do you really need to alienate over semantics?

Anything that amounts to demanding everybody accept and encourage your life choices, sexual or otherwise. The notion of judging one another based on our decisions and behaviours is a big deal to right leaning people, telling them that certain behaviours or choices are not only unquestionable but must be approved of is again pointless and needlessly drives away voters. There is common ground in love and let live, pushing beyond that to get back at the old guard is driving away potential allies at a time that can't be afforded.

Labelling any criticism of Islam as Islamaphobia. For that matter, use of pretty much all the morality-a-phobias should be done away with. Go back to demanding people live and let live without the requirement everyone embrace or endorse other people's decisions without being shouted down as immoral.

BLM

Refusing to allow rational discussion of statistically factual trends or differences between populations because it's racist or sexist. Those differences are a part of our reality and just demanding everyone put their heads in the sand drives many people unwilling to do so away. It also is damaging because many problems in society that we need to fix are informed by that data.

Yes they did.

Found a press release.
http://www.renovomotors.com/marty-press-release/

"MARTY was built in collaboration with Renovo Motors, an automotive start-up based in Silicon Valley that specializes in building advanced electric vehicle technology. Working closely together gave the Stanford team early access to a brand new platform derived from Renovo’s electric supercar that delivers 4,000 pound-feet from on-motor gearboxes to the rear wheels in a fraction of a second – allowing precise control of the forces required to drift."

Or maybe we tackle this from 180 degrees.

As opposed to what is happening, or how likely, we may find common ground on what it is we should actually be doing.

I've already made the suggestion of electric vehicles and fission, fusion or renewables in place of coal as the road away from emissions. Specifically improving li-ion batteries as Tesla is doing is a major step. Researching sodium-oxygen batteries would be even better as they can hold 4-5 times the power and have cheaper materials and recent results have us close to making them viable, so I'd like to see gov money directed there.

For power solar and wind are currently only cost-competitive because the scale is small enough that we get away with treating coal plants like giant batteries covering our baseline. They simply aren't cost effective to scale up for base load yet, and not likely to be for another 10-20 years. We can have a lot of nuclear plants built in that time. With electric cars coming into the picture, we're also going to need that extra electric capacity. I again would strongly encourage more gov money going into French style large scale nuclear power deployment. China's already doing it, even they've had enough of their current coal literally blocking the sun in the sky on them and nuclear is part of their clean air push. We should be encouraging that and following suit out this way.

I also wasn't kidding about Lockheed-Martin's fusion research. A lot of new ideas are out there for fusion confinement plans and Lockheed has publicly declared their intentions to have a demonstration reactor in 5 years time. I'm hopeful, and if that pans out, the roll out of truly cheap and clean power will start in the next decade for the sole reason that fusion under cuts coal for price.

Part of me reason for these measures versus more drastic ones is we need to keep our economies growing because regardless of what we do the next 30 years, the oceans will continue rising that entire time and the mitigation measures we're going to gradually be spending more and more on are gonna required us to have the money to do them.

If anybody's got better suggestions I'm all ears.

This is what I imagine the future of transport will be like - I get in my electric vehicle in the morning, and sit down as it takes off toward the destination I want to go. I spend the ride checking email, listening to music, or just relaxing, as the correct route is dynamically updated to avoid construction, traffic jams, etc. At the end of the journey that's cost me very little, gotten me safely to my destination, and had minimal environmental impact, my vehicle moves on to pick up other passengers BECAUSE IT'S A GODDAMN BUS AND BUSES HAVE ALWAYS WORKED LIKE THIS.

Yeah, "applicable only to the very lightest of electric vehicles". Something like that would at least have a chance of working. Basically something like a Segway, an electric bike, a small cart/kart/trike, something like that. Though how much of a weight save compared to loss of driving dynamics/stability/safety you'd get is a bit iffy, the suspension bits in a 200 pound vehicle are already very light.

But yeah, something like that might work.

I think that at best this would be applicable only to the very lightest of electric vehicles (something in the "motorcycle" weight class, even half a ton is probably too heavy), and I have my doubts about even those, even when completely disregarding the sideways forces.

With a system like this you do not want more than a few cm (about an inch, at a guess) of suspension travel from when the car is lifted in air to the car at rest (= 1G vertical load), just from the weight of the car compressing the springs. If you have more the springs (which the loops naturally are) have to compress a lot with each revolution, which strains them, heats them, isn't good for rolling resistance, etc.

If we assume a 1000 kg car with a 50/50 weight distribution, to get about 2 cm of suspension travel the spring stiffness would be about comparable to a high level GT racing car. Comparing to high level sports cars, the street going Porsche 911 GT3 RS car, which is regarded as a pretty stiff, racy and track oriented vehicle has something in the region of three times that much travel, a normal commuter car can have way over 10 cm due to soft, comfort oriented springs.

So you can't spring a proper car with just these because it'd require it to be too stiff (also I can foresee shock absorption issues). Another problem is the 360 degree springy nature of it. You really don't want car tyres to move much aside from up and down. These have the problem that when you brake, the forces will try to push the axle forwards in relation to the wheel (i.e. the wheel moves backwards while braking), and the reverse when accelerating. You'd be (possibly) drastically changing the wheelbase of the car during acceleration and braking, which could have catastrophic results for handling in extreme situations. Many if not most cars these days are capable of braking at over 1 G, as long as they have decent tyres, so the front-back movement could be bigger than the up-down movement.

So yeah, doesn't really sound like a workable solution as the ONLY spring system on a car. Having some springiness in the tyres (either in the wheel itself of just having larger profile tyres, like we used to back in the day) can be helpful for comfort and even handling in some cases, but springing the car only via the wheels isn't a good idea, you really want to be able to control the wheels better than that.

Great! But how does it do with large side forces, like cornering at high speed? If they do well, perhaps this is a way to eliminate suspension in electric vehicles, reducing weight but keeping a smooth ride. That would be a big leap forward!
I've seen something similar with maybe 20 curved 'spokes' (looking like a turbine from the side) that was tunable, made harder or softer by adding/removing 'spokes'. The issue with them was the spokes created lots of resistance...like turning a turbine.

People think of self-driving cars as something we'll have in the future. With systems like adaptive driver assist, they are pretty much already here. Hell some cars even steer for you. It'll take a generational shift before people are comfortable in cars they aren't driving but I suspect we'll be seeing automated vehicles in action before long, especially in commercial space. Once people realize just how much more safe they will be, it'll really catch on. Eventually the idea of a vehicular accident will be nearly unheard of.

This is a future that is already becoming a reality, and it will arrive with inexpensive electric vehicles driven by a competitive revolution started already by Elon Musk.

Asphalt may be petroleum based, but it's also one of the most recycled products ever...around 99% of all asphalt is recycled. The increasing cost of petroleum will take decades to make this a cheaper alternative.

It does -nothing- for electric vehicles, or for snowplowing. Those claims are nothing but the purest bullshit. The amount of electricity needed to melt more than a trace of snow is utterly prohibitive. Which is why you don't see heated roads...or any of the others that this video "addresses" (without providing any actual facts, of course).

you're not wrong that rooftop solar panels would collect more energy. but this also kills many birds with one idea/stone. since asphalt is petroleum-based, the costs for roads is constantly going up, this solves that. this solves a lot of issues with electric vehicles, and snow plowing and many others that the video addresses.

but hey, even if this idea ultimately doesn't work out. any work done on this project can be spun off into a new project that could benefit us greatly.

so I've got zero problem investing in this, even if it ultimately it doesn't pan out, because this work will ultimately benefit someone else's work.

Lets not forget that currently the nation spends a great deal of money on simple yearly road repair, and that is only short term as most roads need to be entirely re-milled and replaced once or twice a decade.

I think this technology may well begin to seep into more liberal states, as others have said with parking lots (especially electric vehicle recharging stations) or perhaps with big and wealthy businesses like fast food chains. If the tiles can stay relatively undamaged over decades, eventually it would become very cost effective.

Yes melting snow would be improbable until perhaps there were enough roads connected to say the national grid. But everything else is not only probably but plausible.

I really hope this technology is implemented, slowly but surely. But I fear things like this won't become a viable alternative until the world is so tapped for oil and natural gas that there IS no alternative but to go with solar and wind technologies as a primary resource. Sadly America is woefully behind much of Europe. Some nations in Eur-Asia plan to be oil free within 100 years. The US will be mired in wars over the last scraps of the limited resources by then if something doesn't change.