I personally think forcing less well off people to use worse modes of transport (or not travel at all) is not a well thought out scheme for reducing environmental impact.
For me, it doesn't matter because my main mode of transport is an EV - but it's a luxury I can afford. Many people that live around me cannot.
It just means these people donate more of their money to the wallets of already absurdly rich owners of companies like Shell and Exxon - instead of using it to enrich their own lives (see the increased profits these companies are making since Iran).
But at least on a positive note, EV sales in my country have never been higher since Trump invaded Iran, so it is somewhat triggering the well-off to finally make the ("scary") switch to EV's.
Comments
I personally think forcing less well off people to use worse modes of transport (or not travel at all) is not a well thought out scheme for reducing environmental impact.
For me, it doesn't matter because my main mode of transport is an EV - but it's a luxury I can afford. Many people that live around me cannot.
It just means these people donate more of their money to the wallets of already absurdly rich owners of companies like Shell and Exxon - instead of using it to enrich their own lives (see the increased profits these companies are making since Iran).
But at least on a positive note, EV sales in my country have never been higher since Trump invaded Iran, so it is somewhat triggering the well-off to finally make the ("scary") switch to EV's.