• 🔰Hurling⚜️Durling🔱@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 months ago

    Opting for gasoline over electricity early on when cars started to become a thing, we were already going electric, but a smear campaign put fear into people’s minds about electric and switched tk gasoline.

    • arxdat
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      We always have to pander to the capitalists profits, how could the make money with clean electricity???

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Batteries could have been standard for a bit longer, but it seems to me that eventually the need to go faster for longer would have forced combustion engines to be a thing. All they had were lead-acid batteries (or primary cells, but that would be dumb) and new more energy-dense chemistries didn’t show up for a long time after. Maybe they could have found one if they really needed, but it’s a tricky science even today, so I’m skeptical.

      It’s possible, I suppose, that infrastructure could have been rolled out for both en mass, but I don’t see an even mix lasting through the whole 20th century. Probably not even past WWII.

      • 🔰Hurling⚜️Durling🔱@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s because of car companies pushing the mentality that everyone needs to drive everywhere… for freedom and shit.

        We could have been more like europe is today and have a robust railsystem. Shit, we could have had the best rail system in the world.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Or, y’know, there’s a war on and you can’t stop to recharge, or you need to cross a desert, or you just want to do an express route with one vehicle…

          Combustion is just a superior vehicle technology vs. lead-acid electric, assuming you don’t worry about emissions, and that will show up in plenty of contexts. Eventually, lead-acid would go the way of the other workable-but-not-as-nice technologies like crystal radios or black-and-white film.

          • 🔰Hurling⚜️Durling🔱@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            So… there isnt a war in the US right now, and there probablywont be one.

            “Lead-acid electric…” when was the last time you looked at an electric car. Electric cars can now give you 400+ miles of range just like ICE vehicles, and I don’t have to scavenge fuel from who knows where, all I need is a few solar panels and I’m good… eventually.

            Also, IF this was a war zone, I’d rather be whisper quiet than to tell everyone around that I’m driving by with the sound of an engine. Oh and it’s easier to remain undetected by food than on a vehicle anyway.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yeah, I know, I’m not arguing against electric now, or even as a concept then. This was an alt-history exercise, remember?

              Batteries could have been standard for a bit longer, but it seems to me that eventually the need to go faster for longer would have forced combustion engines to be a thing. All they had were lead-acid batteries (or primary cells, but that would be dumb) and new more energy-dense chemistries didn’t show up for a long time after. Maybe they could have found one if they really needed, but it’s a tricky science even today, so I’m skeptical.

              It’s possible, I suppose, that infrastructure could have been rolled out for both en mass, but I don’t see an even mix lasting through the whole 20th century. Probably not even past WWII.