Lol, everything that's written in this news article is bent one way to show that electrification is a bad thing.
The disinformation campaign continues
Biden Is Forcing Electric Vehicles on the American Public While Misrepresenting Their Efficiency
www.instituteforenergyresearch.org
Biden Is Forcing Electric Vehicles on the American Public While Misrepresenting Their Efficiency
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new emissions standards for vehicles require manufacturers to increase overall fuel efficiency by over 25 percent…
www.instituteforenergyresearch.org
1 - 20 of 124 Posts
Alternate fuel is probably the option. Currently electricity is most viable option but who knows what will hold in future. Lithium mining is just as bad as oil. As most of you see with your Tesla, if the efficiencies of ICE improves by 50% or more, electric cars would not make sense unless battery tech evolve just as fast. I thought Hydrogen and Electric or hydrogen and gas would be something to look forward to.
Combining all we have to produce cars, IMO, is the right answer. Our kids will probably laugh at us for thinking that we had to make a choice between ICE or EV, while they are in fusion cars...
Combining all we have to produce cars, IMO, is the right answer. Our kids will probably laugh at us for thinking that we had to make a choice between ICE or EV, while they are in fusion cars...
Sodium is looking to be an alternative to lithium. Already there are cars equiped with Sodium Ion batteries in China. Their current energy density is equivalent to early day Teslas. And already CATL is promising a significant increase in energy density for 2024.Alternate fuel is probably the option. Currently electricity is most viable option but who knows what will hold in future. Lithium mining is just as bad as oil. As most of you see with your Tesla, if the efficiencies of ICE improves by 50% or more, electric cars would not make sense unless battery tech evolve just as fast. I thought Hydrogen and Electric or hydrogen and gas would be something to look forward to.
Combining all we have to produce cars, IMO, is the right answer. Our kids will probably laugh at us for thinking that we had to make a choice between ICE or EV, while they are in a fusion cars...
Regarding hydrogen, that technology is currently about one third as efficient as pure battery due to inefficiencies in extracting hydrogen and generating electricity with a fuel cell. I don't see that as a viable choice for transportation with maybe some exceptions for large trucks, vessels.
That's not true, because you don't need nearly the volume of lithium to build a car, and then it's reusable both in the same car (as opposed to keeping on feeding it lithium) and potentially after its recycling.Lithium mining is just as bad as oil.
That article has every single scare tactic that's causing hostility toward EV's: that they're going to take away our "freedom" gas cars, that EV's are worse for the planet, and even that it's going to drive up electric rates and force everyone to pay for EV drivers even if they don't have an EV. Oh and one new one: That EV's are going to force the prices of all cars up.
The awful irony of those articles is that they prey on the fear of people who like gas cars (or fear change) of having them taken away, but proposing the solution of taking away EV's from people who want them so they can feel safe with a gas future.
Unfortunately that's going to continue, because anything that requires the consumption of energy has to get it from somewhere. It's a law of physics. We're never going to have cars that come with all the sustainably sourced energy it's ever going to use.
Mining anything is "bad" because of the heavy machinery required. The difference with EVs is that once they're built, they CAN be powered by 100% renewal energy for the life of the vehicle. THEN when the vehicle is past its useful life, a majority of the raw material that was so "bad" to mine can easily be recycled. With an ICE, the fuel powering that vehicle is in our air. There's no way of getting it back... unless you count what we breathe inAlternate fuel is probably the option. Currently electricity is most viable option but who knows what will hold in future. Lithium mining is just as bad as oil. As most of you see with your Tesla, if the efficiencies of ICE improves by 50% or more, electric cars would not make sense unless battery tech evolve just as fast. I thought Hydrogen and Electric or hydrogen and gas would be something to look forward to.
Combining all we have to produce cars, IMO, is the right answer. Our kids will probably laugh at us for thinking that we had to make a choice between ICE or EV, while they are in fusion cars...
Lithium to make the battery is only one issue. Other big ones are electricity generation for our EV's. Solar and wind are options but as you all know, that's not enough to support the need so we use nuclear power built from early 1900's and we also burn coals. So, in a sense we also 'breath in' what we consumed, it's just matter of when we are seeing that damage vs gas use.
Once again, I believe most of us transitioned to EV due to cost, low maintenance and incentives from our gov. I am simply saying that those who did, like myself, for those reason, will soon go back to other option as they become available. If ICE can get 50-70 mpg and bit of torque from electric, that's what I would opt for. If it's green, even better justification. That's all. Not damning the EV or in favor of ICE but if that ICE is pollution free and burns cooler, i think that would be an ideal option.
Right now, it's EV, but in 10 years, who knows.
Once again, I believe most of us transitioned to EV due to cost, low maintenance and incentives from our gov. I am simply saying that those who did, like myself, for those reason, will soon go back to other option as they become available. If ICE can get 50-70 mpg and bit of torque from electric, that's what I would opt for. If it's green, even better justification. That's all. Not damning the EV or in favor of ICE but if that ICE is pollution free and burns cooler, i think that would be an ideal option.
Right now, it's EV, but in 10 years, who knows.
Brought to you by your local oil company paying to keep people in their gas future.Lol, everything that's written in this news article is bent one way to show that electrification is a bad thing.
While everyone is OK with all-electric homes.That article has every single scare tactic that's causing hostility toward EV's: that they're going to take away our "freedom" gas cars, that EV's are worse for the planet, and even that it's going to drive up electric rates and force everyone to pay for EV drivers even if they don't have an EV. Oh and one new one: That EV's are going to force the prices of all cars up.
Our nuclear power tecxh is from the early 1960's up to the mid-1980's. Nobody (on Earth) had nuclear power in the "early 1900's".so we use nuclear power built from early 1900's and we also burn coals. So, in a sense we also 'breath in' what we consumed, it's just matter of when we are seeing that damage vs gas use.
Coal use for power plants has dropped ~90% over the past three decades. Natural gas (via large RICE) is much less expensive and powers up for peak loads much easier than coal plants. And the whole coal mining process - ever hear of "Natural Gas Lung:" from miners?
It's not possible for it to be pollution free, the C in ICE stands for combustion (ie, burning). You're better off waiting for unicorns to exist 😂.if that ICE is pollution free and burns cooler
But what about my gas stove? LolWhile everyone is OK with all-electric homes.
You don't have to wait for those: they're called hybrids.If ICE can get 50-70 mpg and bit of torque from electric, that's what I would opt for.
The biggest issue I have with ICE is its soooooo inefficient. If gas burned at 80 or 90% efficiency we would go forever on a tank and pollute and use far less. But alas gas works on blow it up which creates massive heat and gets about 30% use. The emissions pollutes and can kill you. Nuclear is great and produces far less waste and gets a bad reputation from its early days of use. Using micro nuclear plants that use waste from other plants could supply plenty of power to most small towns. Clean and pretty cheap. Better, would be some miracle solar and battery combo that could work for decades, so far that has not been possible.It's not possible for it to be pollution free, the C in ICE stands for combustion (ie, burning). You're better off waiting for unicorns to exist 😂.
hybrids do not get this mileage on the highway. On the highway the batteries act as extra weight.You don't have to wait for those: they're called hybrids.
You're forgetting though, that in order to change the energy source for the current vehicles most people drive (gas or diesel), it would require changing the entire installed base.Lithium to make the battery is only one issue. Other big ones are electricity generation for our EV's. Solar and wind are options but as you all know, that's not enough to support the need so we use nuclear power built from early 1900's and we also burn coals. So, in a sense we also 'breath in' what we consumed, it's just matter of when we are seeing that damage vs gas use.
Let's say oil runs out tomorrow. That would mean anyone driving a gas car would have to immediately either buy an EV, or just do without a car and walk or bike** (most mass transit except for specific cities in the world are fossil fuel powered as well).
But now fast forward 30 years when hopefully the majority of vehicles are EV's, and then imagine what happens if oil runs out suddenly. Electricity prices might go up a little while some of the power generation switches to alternate fuels, but it would do that even if there were no EV's. Yet transportation continues nearly uninterrupted.
That's the benefit to electric powered cars. It turns energy sources into flex fuel that don't involve forcing everyone to replace their cars to continue life as we know it.
** Yes, I know there are people out there in favor of that happening to force people to give up their vehicles and bike or walk.
The ability for average consumers to become energy independent is so heavily understated. No more budgeting for a huge increase in gas because something potentially trivial happened half way across the world.You're forgetting though, that in order to change the energy source for the current vehicles most people drive (gas or diesel), it would require changing the entire installed base.
Let's say oil runs out tomorrow. That would mean anyone driving a gas car would have to immediately either buy an EV, or just do without a car and walk or bike** (most mass transit except for specific cities in the world are fossil fuel powered as well).
But now fast forward 30 years when hopefully the majority of vehicles are EV's, and then imagine what happens if oil runs out suddenly. Electricity prices might go up a little while some of the power generation switches to alternate fuels, but it would do that even if there were no EV's. Yet transportation continues nearly uninterrupted.
That's the benefit to electric powered cars. It turns energy sources into flex fuel that don't involve forcing everyone to replace their cars to continue life as we know it.
** Yes, I know there are people out there in favor of that happening to force people to give up their vehicles and bike or walk.
In the next 5 years more compelling EV's will come out at various price ranges. (Model 2, equinox and the used market will expand) As these are sold and EV Fast DC chargers continue to expand the out of cost of ICE cars will become obvious. Case in point, Walmart is going to install chargers in all their stores in the next year, I heard from a youtuber. That is a sign that mass adoption in accelerating. Several other stores are adding Level 2 chargers as well. So 2 to 5 more years as the amount of EV's expand and accelerate adoption. It will become the new iphone. Yes some people will keep their flip phone but for how long?You're forgetting though, that in order to change the energy source for the current vehicles most people drive (gas or diesel), it would require changing the entire installed base.
Let's say oil runs out tomorrow. That would mean anyone driving a gas car would have to immediately either buy an EV, or just do without a car and walk or bike** (most mass transit except for specific cities in the world are fossil fuel powered as well).
But now fast forward 30 years when hopefully the majority of vehicles are EV's, and then imagine what happens if oil runs out suddenly. Electricity prices might go up a little while some of the power generation switches to alternate fuels, but it would do that even if there were no EV's. Yet transportation continues nearly uninterrupted.
That's the benefit to electric powered cars. It turns energy sources into flex fuel that don't involve forcing everyone to replace their cars to continue life as we know it.
** Yes, I know there are people out there in favor of that happening to force people to give up their vehicles and bike or walk.
Aren't we as a society just sick and tired of feeling like a pawn to dictators and despots?The ability for average consumers to become energy independent is so heavily understated. No more budgeting for a huge increase in gas because something potentially trivial happened half way across the world.
In Chicago we have junk like this continually going on as well.
abc7chicago.com
All defendants found guilty on all counts in 'ComEd 4' trial surrounding ex-Speaker Mike Madigan
Tuesday marked day five of deliberations in the trial.
abc7chicago.com
1 - 20 of 124 Posts
Tesla Owners Online Forum
A forum community dedicated to Tesla owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about EV performance, charging, reviews, new models, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
