Electric cars are a JOKE!!!

skookerasbil

Platinum Member
Aug 6, 2009
37,963
6,385
1,140
Not the middle of nowhere
But dont take my word for it.....read what leading people in the car industry are saying.......



The electric car mistake

By Charles Lane,
The Obama administration’s electric-car fantasy finally may have died on the road between Newark, Del., and Milford, Conn.

The New York Times’s John M. Broder reported Friday that the Tesla Model S electric car he was test-driving repeatedly ran out of juice, partly because cold weather reduces the battery’s range by about 10 percent.

Broder’s trip turned into a nightmare, including a stretch with the conked-out car riding the back of a flatbed truck.

Tesla chief executive Elon Musk fired back on Monday, tweeting that Broder’s report is a “fake” and that “vehicle logs” show he “didn’t actually charge to max & took a long detour.”

The Times is standing by its story. My take is that even if Musk is 100 percent right and Broder is 100 percent wrong — which I doubt — Musk loses.

Who wants a $101,000 car that might die just because you feel like taking “a long detour”?

President Obama repeatedly declared that, with enough federal aid, we can put a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015. His administration has invested about $5 billion in grants, guaranteed loans — including $465 million for Tesla — and tax incentives to buyers.

Yet Americans bought just 71,000 plug-in hybrids or all-electric vehicles in the past two years, according to GreenCarReports.com. That’s about a third as many as the Energy Department forecast in a 2011 report that attempted to explain why Obama’s goal was not preposterous.

Federal billions cannot overcome the fact that electric vehicles and plug-in electric hybrids meet few, if any, of real consumers’ needs. Compared with gas-powered cars, they deliver inferior performance at much higher cost. As an American Physical Society symposium on battery research concluded last June: “Despite their many potential advantages, all-electric vehicles will not replace the standard American family car in the foreseeable future.”

If you don’t believe the scientists, listen to Takeshi Uchiyamada, the “father” of the Toyota Prius: “Because of its shortcomings — driving range, cost and recharging time — the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most conventional cars.”

Even Nissan chief Carlos Ghosn, whose commitment to the all-electric Leaf helped his firm get a $1.4 billion U.S. loan guarantee, has reduced his boosterism in the face of disappointing sales.

Nor do electric cars promise much in the way of greenhouse-gas reduction, as long as they rely on a power grid that is still mostly fired by fossil fuels.

As for Vice President Biden’s 2009 forecast of “billions and billions and billions of dollars in good, new jobs,” the electric car factory at which he made that statement sits idle. Ditto the taxpayer-backed Michigan factory of battery maker LG Chem. Two Energy Department-funded lithium-ion battery makers have gone bankrupt.

There’s simply no denying that the administration’s electric-vehicle project was a mistake.

But it’s worth asking precisely what kind of mistake (beyond eminently foreseeable and terribly expensive). As Bruce Springsteen once sang: “Is a dream a lie if it don’t come true, or is it something worse?”

I accept the president’s good intentions. He didn’t set out to rip off the public. Nor was the electric-car dream a Democrats-only delusion. Several Republican pols shared it, too.

Rather, the debacle is a case study in unchecked righteousness. The administration assumed the worthiness and urgency of its goals. Americans should want electric cars, and therefore they would, apparently.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, he of the Nobel Prize in physics, epitomized the regnant blend of sanctimony and technocratic hubris. He once told journalist Michael Grunwald that photosynthesis is “too damn inefficient,” and that DOE might help correct that particular error of evolution.

The department has recently backed away from the million-car target, in favor of reducing battery costs to $300 per kilowatt hour by 2015 (from $650 today). Even this seems dubious, given the APS symposium’s view that “only incremental improvements can be expected” in lithium-ion batteries.

Chu is on his way out but still dreaming. “For the engineers in the room or those who follow this, you might be saying to yourself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ” he remarked at the Washington Auto Show. “We’re not smoking anything. They are ambitious goals but they are achievable goals.”

I might add that Chu does not own a car.


Charles Lane: Obama?s electric car mistake - The Washington Post



laugh-1.jpg
 
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.
 
Musk can get mad because Broder didn't follow the route. But that is not the real issue. No one wants to deal with 100 variables just to drive to work.
 
Last edited:
Ever wonder why there's no such thing as an electric Tow Truck? This isn't Brain surgery.
 
I can see it now. A weak and frail vegetarian with a grey ponytail sitting on the side of the road, crammed into his tiny little electric car with the Obama/Biden sticker on the rear bumper, munching on a bag of trail mix, sipping on his caffeine-free latte, waiting for his AAA roadside assistance guy driving a big V8 tow truck to take him back to his modular home to get his bicycle. I'll bet the tow truck driver got a good laugh. :lol::lol::lol:
 
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

The horseless carriage didnt need billions in government subsidies (actual money paid, not tax deductions) to take over horses.
 
i can see it now. A weak and frail vegetarian with a grey ponytail sitting on the side of the road, crammed into his tiny little electric car with the obama/biden sticker on the rear bumper, munching on a bag of trail mix, sipping on his caffeine-free latte, waiting for his aaa roadside assistance guy driving a big v8 tow truck to take him back to his modular home to get his bicycle. I'll bet the tow truck driver got a good laugh. :lol::lol::lol:


laugh


my


balls


off
 
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
 
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.
 
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.

The internet was funded by government when it caught on. It is not who funds it, but is it worth a crap. A $100K electric golf cart is not worth the price. A small ethanol, nat gas, diesel or gas car will run circles around it's lifeless carcass for a quarter of the price.

Lithium batteries are not the answer. They are way to expensive, made from rare elements, have low energy density, prone to thermal runaway & take to long to charge.

Ambri's liquid metal battery may be an answer if they get it developed. I am waiting to see what kind of energy density & weight specs it will have. It may only be good for large scale energy storage & to heavy for automobiles.
 
Last edited:
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.

Are you truly that stupid? You are telling me that the development of airplanes was not funded by government? After Kittyhawk, the Wright Brothers, as well as others recieved and competed for government money to fund development. By WW1, our government, as well as many others around the world were putting major money into the development of airplanes.

There are many things in our lives that were funded by government money in some or many stages of development, including the means with which we are communicating. Your idiotic insistance that nothing good can come of government investment is just another really stupid wingnut mantra totally at odds with reality.
 
This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.

Are you truly that stupid? You are telling me that the development of airplanes was not funded by government? After Kittyhawk, the Wright Brothers, as well as others recieved and competed for government money to fund development. By WW1, our government, as well as many others around the world were putting major money into the development of airplanes.

There are many things in our lives that were funded by government money in some or many stages of development, including the means with which we are communicating. Your idiotic insistance that nothing good can come of government investment is just another really stupid wingnut mantra totally at odds with reality.




Its out of control Ray.......billions and billions wasted on crap each year. C'mon Ray....you act as if anybody anywhere right of center thinks ALL government investment is bad. George Bush was a complete and total asshole with "government investment" on everything from education ( a total failure) to renewable energy ( another total failure). Obama has just taken it to new levels of laugh. Our kids and grandkids will suffer mightily because of it and have no hope for any quality of life in the decades to come = 100% certainty.


Anyway........perhaps the most collassal joke of all is this investment into electric cars. As I pointed out with my links, the car industry bigs ( see link in Post #1) say they are but a fringe market for decades to come. And thank God for that......every time I drive next to a SMARTCAR I think to myself, "This poor fucker is probably real proud of himself advertising that he cares more about the environment than anybody else!!!"......meanwhile, his mere presence on the road is a mortal danger to others driving around him. Driving in a place like Long Island New York with traffic levels most in the nation have no clue about, these assholes cant even stay aero-steady on the highway with an 18 wheeler near them and dozens of other cars around them going 70 mph. I cant deal with the level of self-important arrogance........which is why every time I drive next to them, I point at them and laugh in a highly animated fashion. I figure if somewhere along the way I can get one to feel like a fool and part with his 2 door SPECK, Im saving some lives.




By the way......people will note that my sources are invariably mainstream news sources and not special interest green sites/sources that the warmists ALWAYS reference.
 
Last edited:
And the first time someone passed one of them newfangled horseless carriages as it was broke down beside the road, I bet they also had a good laugh.

This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.

It's funded by tax dollars because the government is trying to reduce dependency of oil.
This, whist being green, is more political in so much as losing Arab oil supplies would destroy the American economy in a few weeks.
 
This is the reason the OP is a short sighted, stuck in the past, twit.

The first cars were a joke, the first aircraft were a joke, the first everything is less than perfect and that goes for electric cars as well.
However, technology moves quickly and they'll be a normal part of life within a very short time.

I recall seeing a British TV technology program that described how to connect one of those new fangled mobile phones to a computer in order to send data.

It'll never catch on.
The difference is that those inventions of the past were funded by the inventors, not the government and not by tax dollars.

It's funded by tax dollars because the government is trying to reduce dependency of oil.
This, whist being green, is more political in so much as losing Arab oil supplies would destroy the American economy in a few weeks.
Taxpayers money is being pissed away on companies like Solyndra, not because Obama is trying to save the planet, but because he owes his contributors (like the CEO of Solyndra).
 
Taxpayers money is being pissed away on companies like Solyndra, not because Obama is trying to save the planet, but because he owes his contributors (like the CEO of Solyndra).

That is usually the reason government is not efficient. Each party is more concerned with political pay offs than with the welfare of the majority of the citizens. The larger government grows as a percent of GDP the larger this problem gets.
 
Taxpayers money is being pissed away on companies like Solyndra, not because Obama is trying to save the planet, but because he owes his contributors (like the CEO of Solyndra).

That is usually the reason government is not efficient. Each party is more concerned with political pay offs than with the welfare of the majority of the citizens. The larger government grows as a percent of GDP the larger this problem gets.

OK, and where were you when Bush was in office. Under Obama, the government spending as a percetage of the GDP is actually declining slightly. Under Clinton, with good economic times, it declined sharply, under Bush, it rose sharply.

US government spending as percent of GDP - Charts Tables History
 
Liberals are experts in posting up bogus information......stats that try to shine shit. They do it all the time.......for example, they will post up links showing 150% growth in a segment of renewable energy......so it looks very impressive. The astute of the world are on to this BS however, always asking themselves, "Stats are great.....but compared to what?". When your baseline is below sea level, any increase is impressive. A chick who tells people she got a 100% increase in her bust size seems impressive, but if its going from flat to A-cup, not so much.:up:

Accordingly............

DEBT.png


Government Debt Chart: United States 1997-2017 - Federal State Local Data


George Bush was a spending clown, the worst our country has known. Until now:2up: Bush generally ran deficits between 250 billion and 500 billion. Obama is running deficits well in excess of 1 trillion now. There is no comparison in real terms.

Directly from the CBO.........


USbudgetDeficitChart.jpg




You will always notice that far left posters in this forum consistently post up distracting/bogus data, whether its science or economics......the whole Wizard of Oz presentation.


Which is why Sk00ks exists on this forum.........the consistently pull back the curtain all the way!!!:eusa_dance::funnyface::eusa_dance::funnyface::eusa_dance::funnyface:
 

Forum List

Back
Top