When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Well, there you have it. All the saps can run down to their local EV dealer and reduce their carbon footprints.
Report back here so that the rest of us can thank you for "saving the planet". I wish I could work with the brilliant minds at the UN to make every one of its employees buy an EV with their own money and to stop using any ICE powered vehicles. Including aircraft. Then put them all on sailing rafts back to their homes.
I'm sure the UN would be happy if the United States wrote them a few more blank checks for lots of sky is falling stuff. This from a globalist group with extremist extremist countries in the middle east on their human rights councils........WRIIIIIIIGT.
I was at a cars and coffee in IA where someone had one of these. Obviously there were some battery upgrades (and I'm making the assumption this is an electric car) but it was a super old electric car. I don't know if it was this one exactly, or all original but he claimed that there were a few attempts at electric cars at the start of the automobile technology at the the turn of the century, and he had one.
The first electric car in the United States was developed in 1890-91 by William Morrison of Des Moines, Iowa; the vehicle was a six-passenger wagon capable of reaching a speed of 23 kilometres per hour (14 mph)
I still maintain that until EV battery tech doesn't use a limited resource that is toxic to produce, we are just changing from one problem to another. What happens in 50 years when lithium batteries causes cancer and the next ice age? Not that I don't think its competition for ICE, it is, and should continue to be developed, but it needs to be marketing with facts, not political propaganda.
I have never seen a coherent explanation of how batteries can be produced and deployed so as to store the vast quantities of electricity needed in the U.S. alone. It would cost a prohibitive $133 billion to buy batteries sufficient to store one state’s electricity–Minnesota’s–for 24 hours. Minnesota is an average sized state, so that corresponds to around $6.6 trillion for 24 hours storage for the U.S. That is much more than the entire budget of the U.S. government. This assumes that such batteries exist, which they don’t.
Bringing electricity from those facilities, and connecting a nationwide GND grid, would require thousands of miles of new transmission lines – onshore and underwater – and even more raw materials.
Providing those materials would result in the biggest expansion in mining the United States and world have ever seen: removing hundreds of billions of tons of overburden, and processing tens of billions of tons of ore – mostly using fossil fuels. Where we get those materials is also a major problem.
If we continue to ban mining under modern laws and regulations here in America, those materials will continue to be extracted in places like Inner Mongolia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, largely under Chinese control – under labor, wage, health, safety, environmental and reclamation standards that no Western nation tolerates today. There’ll be serious pollution, toxics, habitat losses and dead wildlife.
Even worse, just to mine cobalt for today’s cell phone, computer, Tesla and other battery requirements, over 40,000 Congolese children and their parents work at slave wages, risk cave-ins, and get covered constantly in toxic and radioactive mud , dust, water and air. Many die. The mine sites in Congo and Mongolia have become vast toxic wastelands. The ore processing facilities are just as horrific.
Meeting GND demands would multiply these horrors many times over. Will Green New Dealers require that all these metals and minerals be responsibly and sustainably sourced, at fair wages, with no child labor – as they do for T-shirts and coffee? Will they now permit exploration and mining in the USA?
There would be no market for EVs without the propaganda. None.
That sounds like a testable assertion. How many Tesla customers later went back to ICE cars?
If that percentage is small, then you're clearly wrong. But if the percentage is large, that would argue in favor of the whole trend being driven by hype, propaganda, and virtue signaling.
It would cost a prohibitive $133 billion to buy batteries sufficient to store one state’s electricity–Minnesota’s–for 24 hours.
As has been pointed out numerous times, this argument is astonishingly stupid and doesn't deserve further airing here, or anywhere else. This is like saying it would take an unreasonably long time for me to flap my arms and fly to Mars.
If that percentage is small, then you're clearly wrong. But if the percentage is large, that would argue in favor of the whole trend being driven by hype, propaganda, and virtue signaling.
Not following. If a large number of buyers continue to believe the hype, propaganda, and signal their virtue, wouldn't they continue buying EVs, regardless?
I don't believe that is the case - there are situations where an EV makes sense - I just don't think that what current EV owners buy proves anything one way or another. Without hype, propaganda, and virtue signaling, the sales would certainly be lower but that's true of many products.
That sounds like a testable assertion. How many Tesla customers later went back to ICE cars?
If that percentage is small, then you're clearly wrong. But if the percentage is large, that would argue in favor of the whole trend being driven by hype, propaganda, and virtue signaling.[/i][/i]
As has been pointed out numerous times, this argument is astonishingly stupid and doesn't deserve further airing here, or anywhere else. This is like saying it would take an unreasonably long time for me to flap my arms and fly to Mars.
Look at EV sales in Norway after the govt dropped the tax credits or whatever they had. Hero to 0 in a day.
Not following. If a large number of buyers continue to believe the hype, propaganda, and signal their virtue, wouldn't they continue buying EVs, regardless? I don't believe that is the case - there are situations where an EV makes sense - I just don't think that what current EV owners buy proves anything one way or another. Without hype, propaganda, and virtue signaling, the sales would certainly be lower but that's true of many products.
My impression (not having driven one) is that a lot of people buy Teslas to be trendy, but then can't stop talking about how great they are to drive. If they were crappy cars, people would presumably go back to ICE vehicles.
Originally Posted by lupo.sk
Look at EV sales in Norway after the govt dropped the tax credits or whatever they had. Hero to 0 in a day.
Good example of the argument in favor of "propaganda," no question about it. Or in this case, propaganda combined with a temporary tax break.
However, Norway never made sense for these vehicles in the first place, as far as I can tell. They have lots of access to oil, and it's cold as hell. Battery EVs in Norway always seemed like the answer to a question that nobody asked.
My impression (not having driven one) is that a lot of people buy Teslas to be trendy, but then can't stop talking about how great they are to drive. If they were crappy cars, people would presumably go back to ICE vehicles.
They are a blast to drive - at least for a limited amount of time... 0-60 and 60-90 times are great but are useless at freeway speeds in yerp since the range is lower than 1/2 of the rating at sustained 90-95ish mph, which is what most people drive around here.
Originally Posted by Noah Fect
Good example of the argument in favor of "propaganda," no question about it. Or in this case, propaganda combined with a temporary tax break.
However, Norway never made sense for these vehicles in the first place, as far as I can tell. They have lots of access to oil, and it's cold as hell. Battery EVs in Norway always seemed like the answer to a question that nobody asked.
However, Norway never made sense for these vehicles in the first place, as far as I can tell. They have lots of access to oil, and it's cold as hell. Battery EVs in Norway always seemed like the answer to a question that nobody asked
So like the US on the oil part and the entire upper half of the US on the "cold" part?
12-02-2019, 02:57 PM
