zlacker

EVs also don't solve the other issues with cars.

Like how deadly they are, microplastics and pollution from tire/road wear, noise in residential areas, the huge waste of area, expensive upkeep of infrastructure, how they make cities less inhabitable etc etc.

>>matsem+(OP)
> how they make cities less inhabitable

Everyone says they would love to live in a walkable city, but for some reason, at least in the US, the biggest gainers in population over the recent decades have been all automobile-centric cities (which are probably more accurately described as a large patchwork of suburbs). NYC would have shrunk due to out-migration to other places if it wasn't for foreign in-migration[0]. Chicago lost people 15 out of the last 20 years[1].

[0]: https://www.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/about/dcp-p...

[1]: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-census-chicago-me...

>>gottor+jq
> at least in the US

Well the US is never a good example for that, because the US notoriously completely screwed up their city planning w.r.t. cars.

You need to look at examples of cities that were not built around the individual cars to check whether that's possible or not, and whether people like it better or not.

>>gottor+jq
Careful: Chicago is a big city, and it's tough to characterize population loss the way you are. The neighborhood that experienced the most population loss over the last 20 years was Auburn-Gresham, which, while "walkable", is not a place a lot of Chicago residents go out of their way to walk in. One large pattern of population shifts in Chicagoland is from the formerly-redlined south and west sides to the south suburbs, or to the southern states.

The parts of Chicago you'd think about when you think "walkable cities" are thriving.