Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Advocates for EV's are also environmentalists who oppose nuclear plants. However, they surely must be aware that that is the only possible way to produce enough reliable electricity needed to power a national fleet of EV vehicles in the future. There is not enough land area for wind and solar to accomplish this, never mind the country's other growing electric energy needs.
Advocates for EV's are also environmentalists who oppose nuclear plants. However, they surely must be aware that that is the only possible way to produce enough reliable electricity needed to power a national fleet of EV vehicles in the future. There is not enough land area for wind and solar to accomplish this, never mind the country's other growing electric energy needs.
What about those of us who support NEW Q LER but also are open to EVs on a long term basis along with hydrogen and natural gas vehicles as options to become energy independent?
I am all in on Da Atom Splittin.
.
Splitting what atoms ... Where did you get them?
Who owns the mines and the deep-water ports that provide for the transportation of the raw materials.
What does you being "all in" mean?
I really do not care what you do with your money ...
But to what degree are you willing to invest our money or Federally supported effort?
.
99%of the world's sulphur is obtained from crude oil. We need sulphur to vulcanise rubber to make the tyres for the EV's for the EV clowns who want to ban crude oil. They're taf (thick as fuck)Advocates for EV's are also environmentalists who oppose nuclear plants. However, they surely must be aware that that is the only possible way to produce enough reliable electricity needed to power a national fleet of EV vehicles in the future. There is not enough land area for wind and solar to accomplish this, never mind the country's other growing electric energy needs.
That's a much more pragmatic approach to the whole issue, and one I think will ultimately become reality. Pure EV's face a very large obstacle, and that is what the OP reveals, the need for vastly increased electricity production and significant upgrades to the electrical infrastructure. I do believe that the vehicles of the future will be a mix of petroleum, hydrogen, natural gas and electricity, and the market will ultimately decide which one is the long-term solution.What about those of us who support NEW Q LER but also are open to EVs on a long term basis along with hydrogen and natural gas vehicles as options to become energy independent?
It's the burning of fossils fuels, not the byproducts, that is the problem for the enviros.99%of the world's sulphur is obtained from crude oil. We need sulphur to vulcanise rubber to make the tyres for the EV's for the EV clowns who want to ban crude oil. They're taf (thick as fuck)
Advocates for EV's are also environmentalists who oppose nuclear plants. However, they surely must be aware that that is the only possible way to produce enough reliable electricity needed to power a national fleet of EV vehicles in the future. There is not enough land area for wind and solar to accomplish this, never mind the country's other growing electric energy needs.
They ignore the technologies of hybrids, LGN and propane fueled vehicles, which are very efficient and clean. Propane fueled vehicles have been in use by some government agencies for decades.That's a much more pragmatic approach to the whole issue, and one I think will ultimately become reality. Pure EV's face a very large obstacle, and that is what the OP reveals, the need for vastly increased electricity production and significant upgrades to the electrical infrastructure. I do believe that the vehicles of the future will be a mix of petroleum, hydrogen, natural gas and electricity, and the market will ultimately decide which one is the long-term solution.
And that is the problem when the government gets involved to pick winners and losers. It inevitably tries to shoehorn everyone into a one size fits all approach that ends up being just slightly less than miserable for everyone.They ignore the technologies of hybrids, LGN and propane fueled vehicles, which are very efficient and clean. Propane fueled vehicles have been in use by some government agencies for decades.
My friend, a County Sheriff, had his vehicle adapted to propane as well as a few other utility vehicles in his department. However, all the police cruisers remained gasoline powered. His vehicle could still run on gasoline if needed at the flip of a switch.And that is the problem when the government gets involved to pick winners and losers. It inevitably tries to shoehorn everyone into a one size fits all approach that ends up being just slightly less than miserable for everyone.
We won`t run out of seaweed.Nukes are the way to go. Yes, there are dangers, but technology is getting better and better.
Also, I know some on this board don't believe that we will ever run out of fossil fuels, but yes we will. it's just a matter of when. When the fossil fuels run out, there will need to be some alternative else humanity will have to go back to more primitive ways of life.
/——-/ Car builders having second thoughts on EV —- so says Scottie.Advocates for EV's are also environmentalists who oppose nuclear plants. However, they surely must be aware that that is the only possible way to produce enough reliable electricity needed to power a national fleet of EV vehicles in the future. There is not enough land area for wind and solar to accomplish this, never mind the country's other growing electric energy needs.
youtube.com
