Reality check on electric cars

[Saint Guinefort]

GM built all of 1117 EV 1's. That's literally nothing in terms of total car production in the US alone. That they were popular with the people leasing them is meaningless.

No it is not. They were extremely popular among those who got them. Ergo they were popular.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No it is not. They were extremely popular among those who got them. Ergo they were popular.

This is a prepositional fallacy called Affirming the Consequent.

Just because the EV 1 was popular with the 1000 or so people that got one, doesn't mean the vehicle was popular with the public at large. As I have demonstrated repeatedly now, EV's are not popular with the public at large. Roughly 2 out of 3 people won't buy one unless they are forced into it by government. That holds as true for Norway, the world's leader in EV percentage where the government resorted to massive subsidies for EV's and penalties for ICE vehicles because the public wasn't buying EV's on their own.

Without government intervention in the market--TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND IRRATIONAL INTERVENTION--EVs would remain a tiny niche market and never gain general use with the public.

 

[floridafan]

This is a prepositional fallacy called Affirming the Consequent.

Just because the EV 1 was popular with the 1000 or so people that got one, doesn't mean the vehicle was popular with the public at large. As I have demonstrated repeatedly now, EV's are not popular with the public at large. Roughly 2 out of 3 people won't buy one unless they are forced into it by government. That holds as true for Norway, the world's leader in EV percentage where the government resorted to massive subsidies for EV's and penalties for ICE vehicles because the public wasn't buying EV's on their own.

Without government intervention in the market--TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND IRRATIONAL INTERVENTION--EVs would remain a tiny niche market and never gain general use with the public.

Can you document where 2 out of 3 people will not buy electric vehicles. I believe you are once again making up any number to fit your agenda.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

This is a prepositional fallacy called Affirming the Consequent.

Wrong. It does not affirm the consequent. It has nothing to do with that fallacy.

It is a mere statement of fact. If something is of limited availability and it is popular among those people who got it, then it is popular.

That's just the DEFINITION.


Besides: what do you think the converse of my point would be so that you could explain how it affirms the consequent?

Just because the EV 1 was popular with the 1000 or so people that got one, doesn't mean the vehicle was popular with the public at large.

Now YOU are moving the goal posts. NO ONE SAID it was popular with the "public at large". But it was EXTREMELY popular among the small number of people who got one.

As I have demonstrated repeatedly now, EV's are not popular with the public at large.

I don't think anyone actually care what YOU think about EV's. I own one and it is FANTASTIC. I haven't paid for gas in about 3 years now.

Without government intervention in the market--TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND IRRATIONAL INTERVENTION--EVs would remain a tiny niche market and never gain general use with the public.

So why do you like gasoline powered cars? The companies that sell you gasoline are massively subsidized by the government.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Can you document where 2 out of 3 people will not buy electric vehicles. I believe you are once again making up any number to fit your agenda.

See post 2280. You are making an utter fool out of yourself by not reading the thread.

This means a total of 63 percent of Americans said they would not consider buying or leasing an electric car if they were looking for a vehicle today.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

See post 2280. You are making an utter fool out of yourself by not reading the thread.

Can I ask why you hate EV's so much?

I'm genuinely curious. I mean it's a solid technology. SURE it can use for improvements and it will certainly help spur battery tech development. In fact there's already the Na ion battery on the horizon.

EV's are a great way to fuel a vehicle and move it around. The source of the fuel can be spread across a wider variety of things (Solar, hydro, wind, etc.) than just oil.

Maybe you can explain why conservatives all seem to hate, hate, hate, hate hate HATE ev's so much that all they can do is troll the internet to find examples of where things go wrong and then try to scream that no one wants an EV when clearly the opposite is true.

 

[floridafan]

See post 2280. You are making an utter fool out of yourself by not reading the thread.

"According to a poll from Consumer Reports conducted between Jan. 27 to Feb. 18"

Just what year was this??
As battery technology improves, and prices decline, electric will be the wave of the future. Do you really think that auto companies, worldwide, are investing billions in EV technology without knowing exactly what they are doing.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

"According to a poll from Consumer Reports conducted between Jan. 27 to Feb. 18"

Just what year was this??
As battery technology improves, and prices decline, electric will be the wave of the future. Do you really think that auto companies, worldwide, are investing billions in EV technology without knowing exactly what they are doing.

For some reason Conservatives HATE EV's. I mean I understand that EV's are still improving and there ARE real problems with safety and environmental impact of Li batteries but as you noted and as I noted, there's new battery tech on the horizon.

Eons ago I was doing a postdoc on H2 storage for fuel cell vehicles. I went to a conference on transportation fuels in Norway and it was clear at that point that if H2 storage was "solved" it would mean fuel cells would become the standard for vehicles, but if it didn't get "solved" then it would always be a small segment. The intervening couple decades have shown that the solution to safe storage of H2 is yet to be achieved.

But EV's are improving and getting more popular. We got a Chevy Bolt with 300 miles on a charge and it is a FANTASTIC vehicle. We have solar on our house so we don't even pay for the fuel for the car! It's amazing.

Do I wish Li ion batteries were safer or less environmentally impactful? Sure! 100%. And I would GLADLY put my money to seeing that improve as opposed to our non-stop subsidizing of the petroleum industry.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Can I ask why you hate EV's so much?

I'm genuinely curious. I mean it's a solid technology. SURE it can use for improvements and it will certainly help spur battery tech development. In fact there's already the Na ion battery on the horizon.

EV's are a great way to fuel a vehicle and move it around. The source of the fuel can be spread across a wider variety of things (Solar, hydro, wind, etc.) than just oil.

Maybe you can explain why conservatives all seem to hate, hate, hate, hate hate HATE ev's so much that all they can do is troll the internet to find examples of where things go wrong and then try to scream that no one wants an EV when clearly the opposite is true.

I don't "hate" them. I think the market should decide what products are successful, not the government and particularly not the government deciding for the flimsiest of reasons based on bad science and science fiction.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

For some reason Conservatives HATE EV's. I mean I understand that EV's are still improving and there ARE real problems with safety and environmental impact of Li batteries but as you noted and as I noted, there's new battery tech on the horizon.

Eons ago I was doing a postdoc on H2 storage for fuel cell vehicles. I went to a conference on transportation fuels in Norway and it was clear at that point that if H2 storage was "solved" it would mean fuel cells would become the standard for vehicles, but if it didn't get "solved" then it would always be a small segment. The intervening couple decades have shown that the solution to safe storage of H2 is yet to be achieved.

But EV's are improving and getting more popular. We got a Chevy Bolt with 300 miles on a charge and it is a FANTASTIC vehicle. We have solar on our house so we don't even pay for the fuel for the car! It's amazing.

Do I wish Li ion batteries were safer or less environmentally impactful? Sure! 100%. And I would GLADLY put my money to seeing that improve as opposed to our non-stop subsidizing of the petroleum industry.

I don't "hate" EV's. I hate the government saying I HAVE to buy one and banning the alternatives because some retard politician who is a scientific and engineering illiterate wants me to.

That's my beef with them. You want one? Buy one. Don't expect me to pay for public charging stations or subsidize your choice however. This is a massive fail on the part of government. Socialism doesn't fucking work and for all intents, EV's are being pushed by an authoritarian socialist-like government onto us.

 

[Into the Night]

This literally has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Bulverism.

Lie.

You just want people to think you are smarter than you are. You are just a whiny little moron with a big sense of yourself.
And the question still stands: Are you ever right about ANYTHING?

Bulverism fallacy. Void question. RQAA.

The EV1 was only ever leased (so you can't really say anything about it's mass market appeal) but among those who used them they were RIDICULOUSLY popular. It even spawned a documentary about their disappearance ("Who Killed the Electric Car")

Paradox. You are locked into the same paradox as Nordberg. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. You are being irrational.

God you are so fucking uninformed about ANYTHING it's not even amusing at this point.

Bulverism fallacy.

And then you go on your stupid rampage of informal logic fallacies that almost NEVER comport with the topic at hand.

Inversion fallacy. They are YOUR fallacies. YOU made them. It is YOUR problem. Do not blame anyone else for YOUR problem.

 

[Into the Night]

No it is not. They were extremely popular among those who got them. Ergo they were popular.

Special pleading fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

This is a prepositional fallacy called Affirming the Consequent.

It is also a special pleading fallacy, a variant of affirming the consequent.

 

[Into the Night]

Just because the EV 1 was popular with the 1000 or so people that got one, doesn't mean the vehicle was popular with the public at large. As I have demonstrated repeatedly now, EV's are not popular with the public at large. Roughly 2 out of 3 people won't buy one unless they are forced into it by government. That holds as true for Norway, the world's leader in EV percentage where the government resorted to massive subsidies for EV's and penalties for ICE vehicles because the public wasn't buying EV's on their own.

Without government intervention in the market--TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND IRRATIONAL INTERVENTION--EVs would remain a tiny niche market and never gain general use with the public.

Bingo. This exactly right. Indeed, this is also the deal with wind and solar power.

 

[Into the Night]

Can you document where 2 out of 3 people will not buy electric vehicles. I believe you are once again making up any number to fit your agenda.

Go look at the road. Less than 1% of the cars on the road are EVs.

 

[floridafan]

Go look at the road. Less than 1% of the cars on the road are EVs.

It's just the beginning, just the early stages of development. You live in the past my dear, I am sure a horse and buggy will suit you just fine.

 

[Into the Night]

Wrong. It does not affirm the consequent. It has nothing to do with that fallacy.

Denying your fallacy does not make it go away.

It is a mere statement of fact.

Buzzword fallacy. Learn what 'fact' means. It does NOT mean 'Universal Truth'.

If something is of limited availability and it is popular among those people who got it, then it is popular.

Special pleading fallacy (affirming the consequent).

That's just the DEFINITION.

Circular definition fallacy (affirming the consequent).

Besides: what do you think the converse of my point would be so that you could explain how it affirms the consequent?

Nonsense question. Discard of logic.

Now YOU are moving the goal posts.

Fallacy fallacy. He's not moving anything.

NO ONE SAID it was popular with the "public at large".

YOU did, liar. Are you calling yourself 'no one'??

But it was EXTREMELY popular among the small number of people who got one.

Special pleading fallacy.

I don't think anyone actually care what YOU think about EV's.

Omniscience fallacy. You don't get to speak for everyone.

I own one and it is FANTASTIC. I haven't paid for gas in about 3 years now.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! These cars were discontinued in 1999 and destroyed by GM. The only ones surviving are in museums!

You are making shit up again!

So why do you like gasoline powered cars?

Go back and read the thread. RQAA.

The companies that sell you gasoline are massively subsidized by the government.

Lie. EVs are, though. Inversion fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Can I ask why you hate EV's so much?

Go read the thread. RQAA.

I'm genuinely curious.

Lie.

I mean it's a solid technology.

So are gasoline and diesel engines.

SURE it can use for improvements and it will certainly help spur battery tech development. In fact there's already the Na ion battery on the horizon.

The sodium ion battery has a high internal resistance. It cannot be used in EVs as a practical battery. It can help replace the Li-ion batteries used in portable devices like phones, though.

EV's are a great way to fuel a vehicle and move it around.

Nah. Go read the thread.

The source of the fuel can be spread across a wider variety of things (Solar, hydro, wind, etc.) than just oil.

Not good enough. Go read the thread.

Maybe you can explain why conservatives all seem to hate, hate, hate, hate hate HATE ev's so much that all they can do is troll the internet to find examples of where things go wrong and then try to scream that no one wants an EV when clearly the opposite is true.

Go read the thread. RQAA.

 

[Into the Night]

"According to a poll from Consumer Reports conducted between Jan. 27 to Feb. 18"

Just what year was this??
As battery technology improves, and prices decline, electric will be the wave of the future. Do you really think that auto companies, worldwide, are investing billions in EV technology without knowing exactly what they are doing.

RQAA. Stop asking the same question over and over and over mindlessly. It's already been answered. Go read the thread.

 

[floridafan]

RQAA. Stop asking the same question over and over and over mindlessly. It's already been answered. Go read the thread.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/consumers-ready-buy-electric-vehicle-today-survey/626829/