Reality check on electric cars

[Dutch Uncle]

Because Republican and MAGA are not synonymous terms.

No shit, Sybil. What was your first clue?

 

[RB 60]

Thanks for agreeing no one is forcing you to buy an EV despite your previous claim they are.

Trump has two years with a Republican Senate and House. Why didn't he change it?

I made no such claim.

Stupid question.

 

[Nordberg]

The government is giving incentives to buy an EV. They aren't giving incentives to buy an ICE. That is bullshit (discrimination?) and a waste of taxpayer's money.
Lead free (garbage) gasoline and now added methanol were/are being mandated (forced) by the government. So yeah, we're being told what we can and cannot purchase.

The government has been supporting ICEs for a century. We built interstate roads and local roads for them. We have allowed oil companies to buy public land in private bidding to get it cheap. We have a police force regulating roads. Tax payers, whether they drive or not have supported ICEs for generations.

 

[RB 60]

The government has been supporting ICEs for a century. We built interstate roads and local roads for them. We have allowed oil companies to buy public land in private bidding to get it cheap. We have a police force regulating roads. Tax payers, whether they drive or not have supported ICEs for generations.

The government wasn't giving incentives to buy a certain vehicle until EVs came out. Read my post. That's my point. Discrimination!

My gas and local taxes pay for our roads and state taxes pay for main artery roadways. No shit!

 

[Nordberg]

The government wasn't giving incentives to buy a certain vehicle until EVs came out. Read my post. That's my point. Discrimination!

My gas and local taxes pay for our roads and state taxes pay for main artery roadways. No shit!

yes they are. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2...ings-and-broken-dreams-chinas-unfinished-home We fork over trillions to sustain and build the ICE infrastructure.

 

[RB 60]

yes they are. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2...ings-and-broken-dreams-chinas-unfinished-home We fork over trillions to sustain and build the ICE infrastructure.

.....

 

[Lionfish]

Mr. Tiny Penis is sadly uninformed when it comes to the government not mandating that people own an EV.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[QP!]

So, your response to my links to the actual market returns to date is to offer up a sales pitch. Buying into EV charging stations is like buying a time share condo...

Once again Terry this is why we came to the conclusion that you were NEVER to speak about new technology roll outs.

New technologies often require SCALE and REACH before they become profitable. You lose money rolling out Facebook to new users at the start, or Amazon at the start, knowing once you have scale and can add features, that bigger user base CAN and WILL get you to profitability.

As you always do Terry, you lock the tech in time today to make your flawed analysis which is why if you were the advisor to FaceBook or the first cell phone companies, etc, etc, you would be saying to them 'stop, you are not profitable now, and using your sales pitch (AKA forecast usage growth models) to analyse is not the way, I Terry, would do it'.


The above Terry is why you should advise NO ONE because most new technology rollouts, if not ALL, are based 'sales pitches' (aka forecast growth models) to REACH profitability, knowing the tech rollout will NOT start out profitable.



So for your own good Terry, and to stop your embarrassment of yourself, just STOP commenting on technology.

 

[QP!]

The government is giving incentives to buy an EV. They aren't giving incentives to buy an ICE. That is bullshit (discrimination?) and a waste of taxpayer's money.
Lead free (garbage) gasoline and now added methanol were/are being mandated (forced) by the government. So yeah, we're being told what we can and cannot purchase.

As i have pointed out to Terry often, the government has given more than 100 years of incentives, tax bailouts, and subsidies to both ICE vehicle manufacturers and the Oil and Gas companies.


You Magats love your incentives and subsidies, and never cry, when it is for what you want to use and buy, but the SECOND the gov't does anything to begin to level the playing field, even slightly, you cry like bitches to not giv the OTHER, even a small percent of the subsidies or incentives you have enjoyed.


Just think of how many taxpayer bailouts of ICE manufacturers alone their have been and if that did not happen, and instead the companies had to use their own money (empty their bank account and investor cash) how much more expensive every ICE vehicle you bought would have been as that cost would have been amortized, instead into every vehicle sold?

 

[QP!]

The government wasn't giving incentives to buy a certain vehicle until EVs came out. Read my post. That's my point. Discrimination!

My gas and local taxes pay for our roads and state taxes pay for main artery roadways. No shit!

Does not matter.

Those combination of subsidies and incentives and bailouts of ICE and Oil and Gas companies was the government picking winners and losers.

it made it MUCH harder for anyone with any other vehicle platform (EV, etc) to consider getting into the market and competing as they, and their investors knew, they would not just be competing against the ICE manufacturer but also the gov't money supporting them and oil and gas companies.

That is why Tesla, at its origin was not taken as a real risk by anyone.

So to your point, the government was giving incentives to EVERY ICE vehicle over EV and others and that is DISCRIMINATION. It is the government picking winners and losers. And it took Elons deep investor pockets to prove the gov't wrong and prove the model, and for EV's FINALLY to get a tiny share of what ICE and Oil and Gas companies have enjoyed in terms of subsidies, bailouts and incentives.

YOu want to cry 'Just me. ME... ME.. ME... only what i want to buy should get that beneficial discrimination'.

 

[Scott]

First of all, it's not just about what whether the EV polutes once it's on the road. It's also about what it takes to produce them. The first article I linked to explains:
**
While electric cars don't directly emit greenhouse gases when in use, their carbon footprint certainly isn't zero. The manufacturing process of electric cars is energy-intensive and has its own considerable environmental impact.

This may surprise you, but studies have revealed that it actually requires more energy to produce an electric car than it does to produce a traditional one. Therefore, the manufacturing process of electric cars has a higher carbon footprint overall. This is mainly down to the materials needed.

The metals required to construct an electric car are more lightweight than those needed for traditional versions. However, manufacturing these high-performance metals requires a lot of energy, which feeds into the production process's overall carbon footprint.
**

Then there's the carbon footprint of the energy that EVs are charged with. Again, the first linked article explains:
**
On top of this, it's important to remember that electric cars still require a form of energy to function. So while using electricity to operate doesn't directly release fossil fuels, the production of the electricity itself most likely does.

Say, for example, that you're an American citizen who owns an electric car. Given that 83% of U.S electricity comes from non-renewable resources (or fossil fuels) such as coal, oil, and gas, you're most likely going to be charging your electric car using resources that damage the planet.

The production of electricity via these materials requires them to be burned, releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. So, even though your electric car isn't directly emitting greenhouse gases, you're probably playing a role in the emission of such gases when you pop it on charge.
**



First of all, as mentioned in the quote above, 83% of U.S. energy comes from non renewable sources. And they don't even seem to be including nuclear energy.

Nuclear energy has a lot of drawbacks:
The 7 reasons why nuclear energy is not the answer to solve climate change | eu.boell.org

I think the other sources of energy you mention are better, but they do have their issues too. Solar panels seem to have an industry standard duration of 25 years. It certainly saves money over other energy sources assuming it lasts this standard length, but that's only talking about direct savings for the customer. There are other issues with them:
There are grounds for concern about solar power | Al Jazeera

Wind farms also have their issues:
The down side to wind power | Harvard

As does hydroelectric power:
The Downside of Dams: Is the Environmental Price of Hydroelectric Power Too High? | Scientific American

I notice you didn't even respond to the second link in my last post. Did you see it?

You are an idiot not worth responding to. [snip]

These types of comments are why I thread ban you from all my threads. I post a long, researched post providing plenty of evidence for my points of view and you start off with this. You'll note that I started my first post in this thread in response to Nordberg, who is much more civilized, but I decided to give you another chance despite your past insults and so responded to your post. Not sure if I should have bothered, but what's done is done.

 

[Port Tack]

These types of comments are why I thread ban you from all my threads. I post a long, researched post providing plenty of evidence for my points of view and you start off with this. You'll note that I started my first post in this thread in response to Nordberg, who is much more civilized, but I decided to give you another chance despite your past insults and so responded to your post. Not sure if I should have bothered, but what's done is done.

To argue that energy sources such as wind, solar or hydroelectric are anywhere near as damaging as burning fossil fuels is asinine. I think it would be a good idea to thread ban me from your threads. Assholes irritate me. Thank you very much.

 

[IBDaMann]

Those combination of subsidies and incentives and bailouts of ICE and Oil and Gas companies was the government picking winners and losers.

Explain. I don't recall said subsidies, incentives and bailouts.

it made it MUCH harder for anyone with any other vehicle platform (EV, etc) to consider getting into the market and competing as they,

The economics term you are looking for is "barrier to entry." It exists in all industries, in all markets, to some extent. Basically, you have said nothing beyond ICEs exist in a market.

 

[IBDaMann]

To argue that energy sources such as wind, solar or hydroelectric are anywhere near as damaging as burning fossil fuels is asinine.

To argue that burning hydrocarbons is "damaging" is asinine, indicative of a science illiterate who dropped out of high school and who is bent over furniture and reamed every day by the DNC before being allowed to go to bed at night and before being allowed to start the day in the morning.

I think it would be a good idea to thread ban me from your threads.

That's rarely a good idea.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Once again Terry this is why we came to the conclusion that you were NEVER to speak about new technology roll outs.
New technologies often require SCALE and REACH before they become profitable. You lose money rolling out Facebook to new users at the start, or Amazon at the start, knowing once you have scale and can add features, that bigger user base CAN and WILL get you to profitability.
As you always do Terry, you lock the tech in time today to make your flawed analysis which is why if you were the advisor to FaceBook or the first cell phone companies, etc, etc, you would be saying to them 'stop, you are not profitable now, and using your sales pitch (AKA forecast usage growth models) to analyse is not the way, I Terry, would do it'.
The above Terry is why you should advise NO ONE because most new technology rollouts, if not ALL, are based 'sales pitches' (aka forecast growth models) to REACH profitability, knowing the tech rollout will NOT start out profitable.
So for your own good Terry, and to stop your embarrassment of yourself, just STOP commenting on technology.

This is nothing but a No True Scotsman fallacy. My premise is that EV's should not be forced on the market by government, nor should government be subsidizing the installation of charging stations. Worse, government should not be mandating you buy an EV and outlawing alternatives.

I don't care if YOU want an EV. Buy one if it makes you happy. What I do care about is you and your ilk forcing me to buy one and trying tell me that the turd you just sold me is filet mignon. I don't give a shit about Gorebal Warming or your insane, retarded, greentard environmentalist bullshit. Don't force me to partake of your insanity.

 

[Nordberg]

This is nothing but a No True Scotsman fallacy. My premise is that EV's should not be forced on the market by government, nor should government be subsidizing the installation of charging stations. Worse, government should not be mandating you buy an EV and outlawing alternatives.

I don't care if YOU want an EV. Buy one if it makes you happy. What I do care about is you and your ilk forcing me to buy one and trying tell me that the turd you just sold me is filet mignon. I don't give a shit about Gorebal Warming or your insane, retarded, greentard environmentalist bullshit. Don't force me to partake of your insanity.

The government wants to take away your right to pollute. They are trying to do the right thing for your children and the future.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The government wants to take away your right to pollute. They are trying to do the right thing for your children and the future.

No, they're not. They are basing their decisions on bullshit. The same bunch of scientific retards told us decades ago that there was a hole in the ozone layer of the atmosphere at the South pole. The cause was CFC's and eliminating these would fix the problem. Well, we did that and the goddamned hole is still there and just as big.

What passed for scientists a thousand years ago told us the Earth was the center of the universe...

A century ago we had no idea what the bottom of this planet's oceans looked like...

The envirotards, and their idiot minions like you, are full of shit and want to take away my right to reasonable choices.

 

[Into the Night]

Does not matter.

Those combination of subsidies and incentives and bailouts of ICE and Oil and Gas companies was the government picking winners and losers.

There are no subsidies for ICE cars or for the fuel they use.

it made it MUCH harder for anyone with any other vehicle platform (EV, etc) to consider getting into the market and competing as they, and their investors knew, they would not just be competing against the ICE manufacturer but also the gov't money supporting them and oil and gas companies.

There are no subsidies to oil and gas companies.

That is why Tesla, at its origin was not taken as a real risk by anyone.

It still isn't. Less than 1% of the cars on the road are EVs.

So to your point, the government was giving incentives to EVERY ICE vehicle over EV and others and that is DISCRIMINATION. It is the government picking winners and losers. And it took Elons deep investor pockets to prove the gov't wrong and prove the model, and for EV's FINALLY to get a tiny share of what ICE and Oil and Gas companies have enjoyed in terms of subsidies, bailouts and incentives.

YOu want to cry 'Just me. ME... ME.. ME... only what i want to buy should get that beneficial discrimination'.

There are no subsidies for ICE cars or for the fuel they use.
There ARE massive subsidies and mandates for EVs, the batteries they use, and the charging stations they require.

You cannot project YOUR problems on anybody else, Kewpie.

 

[Into the Night]

These types of comments are why I thread ban you from all my threads. I post a long, researched post providing plenty of evidence for my points of view and you start off with this. You'll note that I started my first post in this thread in response to Nordberg, who is much more civilized, but I decided to give you another chance despite your past insults and so responded to your post. Not sure if I should have bothered, but what's done is done.

Censorship doesn't work, Sock.