We require noisy EVs for safety, but let’s stop the real killers: SUVs & gas
Much has been made of the supposed danger to pedestrians from quiet electric cars, to the point where the government now requires noisemakers on each EV model. But if we really want to save pedestrians, and everyone else, we need to target the actual culprits: big, pedestrian-killing SUVs and trucks, and the associated pollution they create.
The noisemaker rule has finally gone into effect, after being tweaked and pushed back over the course of several years. This has resulted in noisier EVs, each with its own noise (some worse than others), in the name of pedestrian safety.
NHTSA’s rule was based on a DOT analysis that showed hybrid vehicles to be 17% more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash, when accounting for situational factors and vehicle age, though this analysis only included hybrid vehicles up through the 2011 model year. The law mandating the DOT to study and propose a rule for this dates back to 2010, when only a handful of electric cars were on the road in the US.
When implementing the noisemaker rule, NHTSA estimated these noisemakers will save 32 lives over the lifecycle of a single model year’s fleet. The rule requires noisemakers for EVs and hybrids when operating under 19 mph, the safest speeds for pedestrians. It does not require noisemakers or minimum decibel levels for gas-powered vehicles, even if those vehicles are equipped with engine stop/start or other technologies, which make the engine quieter or silent in certain situations, e.g., when slowing down and approaching an intersection, a place pedestrians are likely to be.
And as of February of this year, NHTSA has even opened an investigation into whether every electric vehicle since 1997 should be retrofitted, at some cost and difficulty, in order to comply retroactively with the noisemaker rule, in a way that virtually no other vehicle regulation has ever been implemented. The petition itself acknowledges there is no data yet showing relative danger from EVs that are not equipped with noisemakers.
What’s really deadly to pedestrians? SUVs
But there’s another common vehicle type that is 45% more likely to kill pedestrians: “light trucks,” a classification that includes SUVs and pickup trucks. Though “light” might be an odd word to apply, given that today’s SUVs are as large as literal tanks.
Light trucks are more deadly to pedestrians because they are larger and have higher hoods, resulting in decreased pedestrian visibility for drivers (with pedestrians obscured behind hoods, or behind other vehicles that are taller than the pedestrians or cyclists on the other side of them) and more deadly pedestrian impacts.
Cars are required to have bumpers designed for pedestrian safety, but light trucks have a different set of requirements. This leads to light trucks impacting pedestrians higher on the body, which causes more injury to the torso and head than the legs, resulting in deadlier collisions when a light truck is involved.
So not only are they more likely to hit pedestrians, but more deadly when they do.
And in fact, pedestrian death rates have skyrocketed in the US recently, up around 50% in the last decade, reaching the highest point in 40 years. Not coincidentally, SUV sales rates have increased in the same time frame. More deadly vehicles on the road have resulted in more pedestrian death, with the growth in SUVs responsible for killing at least a thousand pedestrians as of 2019 – which is a lot more than 32. Pedestrian deaths continued to rise sharply after 2019, so that number is surely significantly higher now.
The rise of SUVs is not solely a matter of consumer preference. Automakers use light truck exemptions to get out of emissions and safety rules and make more money, and actively push consumers toward these vehicles (even though barely anyone uses them for their intended purpose). How can Americans buy wagons, or city cars, or hatchbacks, when everything on the dealer lot is an SUV?
But running over people isn’t the only way that SUVs are dangerous; the pollution they make is orders of magnitude worse.
Noise itself is deadly
The DOT’s analysis of EV pedestrian safety explicitly did not consider environmental noise as a confounding factor to its research.
In a world choked with noise pollution from combustion engine vehicles, it stands to reason that quieter vehicles would be harder to hear. But if the world were not choked with noise pollution, those quieter vehicles would no longer be too quiet, they would be the norm. In a quieter world, EVs aren’t “harder to hear” once the sounds they make are no longer masked by the pathetic belching of combustion engines. Lower noise levels is a benefit of EVs, not a downside.
Noise itself is incredibly deadly to pedestrians – or rather, to everyone. Noise, mostly from cars but also from other combustion engines (airplanes, small off-road engines, etc.), greatly increases the rate of heart attacks in noisy areas, negatively affects the health of hundreds of millions of Americans, and is responsible for 12,000 premature deaths per year across Europe. Some research shows noise pollution to be just about as deadly as vehicle crashes overall.
The government even knows this to be the case, and has for some time, as it established the Office of Noise Abatement and Control through Congressional acts in the 1970s. This office was intended to study and regulate environmental noise in the US, but was – in a phrase that should be common to people who study social ills – defunded by Reagan in the ’80s.
So since noise is deadly, and since noise itself contributes to the problem the NHTSA wants to solve (by making it harder to hear quieter cars), then why don’t we work on making less noise instead of more?
And then, there’s air pollution
And finally, air pollution is deadlier than all of the above. And air pollution overwhelmingly comes from combustion engines.
Outdoor air pollution kills over 4 million people globally per year (including 100-200K in the US) and shortens global lifespans by two years. The health and environmental costs of fossil fuels add up to $5.3 trillion globally per year.
Much of this pollution and fossil fuel use comes from gasoline-powered vehicles, with larger vehicles like SUVs consuming more fuel and emitting more pollution than smaller vehicles (and tremendously more than zero-emission EVs). Vehicle pollution results in 4 million new cases of childhood asthma per year, sentencing these children to a lifetime of health issues.
Which brings up the point that this pollution is often not killing the people who emit it. Not only are children harmed for a lifetime by this despite not having contributed to this pollution, but environmental damage is disproportionately felt by the poor and is disproportionately emitted by the affluent.
This disparity was recently pointed out by the LA Times, in an article which Tesla CEO Elon Musk criticized despite his company being one of the solutions to this problem (perhaps someone could remind him that he’s still CEO of Tesla?). We already have studies showing that more EVs means cleaner air (with each EV bringing ~$10K in societal health benefits), and we know that more gas cars means dirtier air – and more deaths.
So if you want to reduce deaths, I’ve got a proposal
We know that:
- Big cars kill more pedestrians by running them over.
- Noisy cars kill more people by increasing stress, and also cover up the noises made by cars that operate at a more appropriate volume.
- Big, noisy combustion engines kill a whole lot of people by choking them to death with pollution.
Which means these noisemakers aren’t the most effective solution to the problem they are meant to solve. More effective solutions involve doing something about noise, and about air pollution, and about big pedestrian-murdering vehicles.
This also means that EVs aren’t the only answer. While a Hummer EV, the least-efficient EV, uses about as much energy as a Toyota Prius, one of the most-efficient gas-powered vehicles, the Hummer EV also takes up more space and causes more pedestrian danger. The trend toward SUVs threatens to eliminate emissions reductions from electrification, and while electric SUVs are still vastly efficient than any gas car, they are less efficient than smaller electric cars.
If we truly want to make the world safer for pedestrians, there are a lot of things that we can do outside of noisemakers. A discordant symphony of clown-car sound effects at every intersection isn’t going to be the big change that makes the world more walkable or cyclable.
To do that, we should put cars (or transit) on the road that don’t hog as much space, that don’t obscure pedestrians and cyclists from the view of other drivers, that don’t make the world too loud to think straight, that don’t choke everyone with stinky exhaust. These steps will give people more confidence to use their legs to make use of these more efficient, healthier, cheaper transportation methods – once these myriad benefits are no longer overshadowed by the problem of huge land yachts increasingly trying to murder them.
So here’s a modest proposal for society: If every EV needs a noisemaker for the safety gains mentioned above, then we should also take every “light truck” off the road for even more safety. If we’re thinking about making the EV rule retroactive to 1997, then we can make the much more effective SUV rule retroactive to 1997 as well. Do the latter, and you can have the former.
And if you won’t, then it’s not really about safety, is it?
Featured photo by Charles Edward Miller
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Robinhood stock hit an all-time high Friday as the financial services platform continued to rip higher this year, along with bitcoin and other crypto stocks.
Robinhood, up more than 160% in 2025, hit an intraday high above $101 before pulling back and closing slightly lower.
The reversal came after a Bloomberg report that JPMorgan plans to start charging fintechs for access to customer bank data, a move that could raise costs across the industry.
For fintech firms that rely on thin margins to offer free or low-cost services to customers, even slight disruptions to their cost structure can have major ripple effects. PayPal and Affirm both ended the day nearly 6% lower following the report.
Despite its stellar year, the online broker is facing several headwinds, with a regulatory probe in Florida, pushback over new staking fees and growing friction with one of the world’s most high-profile artificial intelligence companies.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier opened a formal investigation into Robinhood Crypto on Thursday, alleging the platform misled users by claiming to offer the lowest-cost crypto trading.
“Robinhood has long claimed to be the best bargain, but we believe those representations were deceptive,” Uthmeier said in a statement.
The probe centers on Robinhood’s use of payment for order flow — a common practice where market makers pay to execute trades — which the AG said can result in worse pricing for customers.
Robinhood Crypto General Counsel Lucas Moskowitz told CNBC its disclosures are “best-in-class” and that it delivers the lowest average cost.
“We disclose pricing information to customers during the lifecycle of a trade that clearly outlines the spread or the fees associated with the transaction, and the revenue Robinhood receives,” added Moskowitz.
Robinhood is also facing opposition to a new 25% cut of staking rewards for U.S. users, set to begin October 1. In Europe, the platform will take a smaller 15% cut.
Staking allows crypto holders to earn yield by locking up their tokens to help secure blockchain networks like ethereum, but platforms often take a percentage of those rewards as commission.
Robinhood’s 25% cut puts it in line with Coinbase, which charges between 25.25% and 35% depending on the token. The cut is notably higher than Gemini’s flat 15% fee.
It marks a shift for the company, which had previously steered clear of staking amid regulatory uncertainty.
Under President Joe Biden‘s administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission cracked down on U.S. platforms offering staking services, arguing they constituted unregistered securities.
With President Donald Trump in the White House, the agency has reversed course on several crypto enforcement actions, dropping cases against major players like Coinbase and Binance and signaling a more permissive stance.
Even as enforcement actions ease, Robinhood is under fresh scrutiny for its tokenized stock push, which is a growing part of its international strategy.
The company now offers blockchain-based assets in Europe that give users synthetic exposure to private firms like OpenAI and SpaceX through special purpose vehicles, or SPVs.
An SPV is a separate entity that acquires shares in a company. Users then buy tokens of the SPV and don’t have shareholder privileges or voting rights directly in the company.
OpenAI has publicly objected, warning the tokens do not represent real equity and were issued without its approval. In an interview with CNBC International, CEO Vlad Tenev acknowledged the tokens aren’t technically equity shares, but said that misses the broader point.
“What’s important is that retail customers have an opportunity to get exposure to this asset,” he said, pointing to the disruptive nature of AI and the historically limited access to pre-IPO companies.
“It is true that these are not technically equity,” Tenev added, noting that institutional investors often gain similar exposure through structured financial instruments.
The Bank of Lithuania — Robinhood’s lead regulator in the EU — told CNBC on Monday that it is “awaiting clarifications” following OpenAI’s statement.
“Only after receiving and evaluating this information will we be able to assess the legality and compliance of these specific instruments,” a spokesperson said, adding that information for investors must be “clear, fair, and non-misleading.”
Tenev responded that Robinhood is “happy to continue to answer questions from our regulators,” and said the company built its tokenized stock program to withstand scrutiny.
“Since this is a new thing, regulators are going to want to look at it,” he said. “And we expect to be scrutinized as a large, innovative player in this space.”
SEC Chair Paul Atkins recently called the model “an innovation” on CNBC’s Squawk Box, offering some validation as Robinhood leans further into its synthetic equity strategy — even as legal clarity remains in flux across jurisdictions.
Despite the regulatory noise, many investors remain focused on Robinhood’s upside, and particularly the political tailwinds.
The company is positioning itself as a key beneficiary of Trump’s newly signed megabill, which includes $1,000 government-seeded investment accounts for newborns. Robinhood said it’s already prototyping an app for the ‘Trump Accounts‘ initiative.
WATCH: Watch CNBC’s full interview with Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev
Korean auto giants Hyundai and Kia think lower-priced EVs will help minimize the blow from the new US auto tariffs. Hyundai is set to unveil a new entry-level electric car soon, which will be sold alongside the Kia EV2. Will it be the IONIQ 2?
Hyundai and Kia shift to lower-priced EVs
Hyundai and Kia already offer some of the most affordable and efficient electric vehicles on the market, with models like the IONIQ 5 and EV6.
In Europe, Korea, Japan, and other overseas markets, Hyundai sells the Inster EV (sold as the Casper Electric in Korea), an electric city car. The Inster EV starts at about $27,000 (€23,900), but Hyundai will soon offer another lower-priced EV, similar to the upcoming Kia EV2.
The Inster EV is seeing strong initial demand in Europe and Japan. According to a local report (via Newsis), demand for the Casper Electric is so high that buyers are waiting over a year for delivery.
Hyundai is doubling down with plans to introduce an even more affordable EV, rumored to be the IONIQ 2. Xavier Martinet, CEO of Hyundai Motor Europe, said during a recent interview that “The new electric vehicle will be unveiled in the next few months.”
The new EV is expected to be a compact SUV, which will likely resemble the upcoming Kia EV2. Kia will launch the EV2 in Europe and other global regions in 2026.
Hyundai is keeping most details under wraps, but the expected IONIQ 2 is likely to sit below the Kona Electric as a smaller city EV.
More affordable electric cars are on the way
Although nothing is confirmed, it’s expected to be priced at around €30,000 ($35,000), or slightly less than the Kia EV3.
The Kia EV3 starts at €35,990 in Europe and £33,005 in the UK, or about $42,000. Through the first half of the year, Kia’s compact electric SUV is the UK’s most popular EV.
Like the Hyundai IONIQ models and Kia’s other electric vehicles, the EV3 is based on the E-GMP platform. It’s available with two battery packs: 58.3 kWh or 81.48 kWh, providing a WLTP range of up to 430 km (270 miles) and 599 km (375 miles), respectively.
Hyundai is expected to reveal the new EV at the IAA Mobility show in Munich in September. Meanwhile, Kia is working on a smaller electric car to sit below the EV2 that could start at under €25,000 ($30,000).
According to the report, Hyundai and Kia are doubling down on lower-priced EVs to balance potential losses from the new US auto tariffs.
Despite opening its new EV manufacturing plant in Georgia to boost local production, Hyundai is still expected to expand sales in other regions. An industry insider explained, “Considering the risk of US tariffs, Hyundai’s move to target the European market with small electric vehicles is a natural strategy.”
Although Hyundai is expanding in other markets, it remains a leading EV brand in the US. The IONIQ 5 remains a top-selling EV with over 19,000 units sold through June.
After delivering the first IONIQ 9 models in May, Hyundai reported that over 1,000 models had been sold through the end of June, its three-row electric SUV.
While the $7,500 EV tax credit is still here, Hyundai is offering generous savings with leases for the 2025 IONIQ 5 starting as low as $179 per month. The three-row IONIQ 9 starts at just $419 per month. And Hyundai is even throwing in a free ChargePoint Home Flex Level 2 charger if you buy or lease either model.
Unfortunately, we likely won’t see the entry-level EV2 or IONIQ 2 in the US. However, Kia is set to launch its first electric sedan, the EV4, in early 2026.
Ready to take advantage of the savings while they are still here? You can use our links below to find deals on Hyundai and Kia EV models in your area.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
As EVBox shuts down its Everon business across Europe and North America, EV charging provider Blink Charging is stepping up to offer support to customers caught in the transition.
EVBox’s software arm Everon recently announced it’s winding down operations alongside EVBox’s AC charger business. That’s left a lot of charging station hosts and drivers wondering what comes next. Now, EVBox Everon is pointing its customers toward Blink as a recommended alternative.
Blink says it’s ready to help, whether that means keeping existing chargers up and running or replacing aging gear with new Blink chargers.
“EVBox has played a significant role in the growth of EV charging infrastructure across the UK and Mainland Europe, and we recognize the trust hosts have placed in its solutions,” said Alex Calnan, Blink Charging’s managing director of Europe. “With the recent announcement of Everon’s withdrawal from the EV charging market, it’s natural to have questions about what this means for operations. At Blink, we want to assure Everon customers that we are here to help them navigate this transition.”
Blink says it’s able to offer advice, replacements, and ongoing network management to make the changeover as smooth as possible.
Everon users who switch to Blink will get access to the Blink Network portal via the Blink Charging app. That opens up real-time insight into charger usage and lets hosts set pricing, manage users, and download performance reports.
“At Blink, our charging technology is future-ready,” added Calnan. “With advancements like vehicle-to-grid technology on the horizon, our chargers are built to support the future of electric vehicles and charging habits.”
The company says its chargers are in stock and ready to ship now for any Everon customers looking to make the jump.
In October 2024, France’s Engie announced it would liquidate the entire EVBox group, which it said posted total losses of €800 million since Engie took over in 2017. EVBox is closing its operations in the Netherlands, Germany, and the US.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike