this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
18 points (95.0% liked)
Technology
42278 readers
109 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Finally! Should have focused more on efficiencies ages ago, but the oil companies wanted more use, not less and looks were more important than gas mileage to customers in things like trucks. But since charging stations have been delayed to prop up oil profits, and so aren't as ubiquitous as gas stations, and battery tech (including fast charging) had been gobbled up and killed off for the last nearly a century by oil companies before cell phones needed it, EVs need that efficiency.
EVs are inherently very efficient. This is about making them cheap.
EVs are inherently cheaper that CE-based alternatives.
So unless this is about stopping the 24/7 propaganda of fossil fuel lobbyists, it's just some useless PR stunt.
It mentions things like reducing friction, enhancing aerodynamics, etc., which should have be applied to all cars long ago. There might be slight differences in what efficiencies apply since components are different, but a lot are shared like shape of the body shell, lots of components in the wheels, axles, transmissions, etc., that could have friction reduced, etc.